HomeMy WebLinkAboutCOUNCIL - COMPLETE AGENDA - 10/25/2011 - COMPLETE AGENDAKaren Weitkunat, Mayor Council Information Center
Kelly Ohlson, District 5, Mayor Pro Tem City Hall West
Ben Manvel, District 1 300 LaPorte Avenue
Lisa Poppaw, District 2 Fort Collins, Colorado
Aislinn Kottwitz, District 3
Wade Troxell, District 4 Cablecast on City Cable Channel 14
Gerry Horak, District 6 on the Comcast cable system
Darin Atteberry, City Manager
Steve Roy, City Attorney
Wanda Krajicek, City Clerk
The City of Fort Collins will make reasonable accommodations for access to City services, programs, and activities
and will make special communication arrangements for persons with disabilities. Please call 221-6515 (TDD 224-
6001) for assistance.
WORK SESSION
October 25, 2011
6 p.m.
1. Call Meeting to Order.
2. Cache La Poudre River Floodplain Regulations. (staff: Jon Haukaas, Ken Sampley,
Marsha Hilmes-Robinson, Brian Varella; 1 hour discussion)
A component of the Stormwater program review requested by City Council in October
2008 included a review of the level of regulation protecting life and property for areas
within the Poudre River floodplain. Floodplain regulation options have been presented
and discussed at three (3) Council work sessions. At the February 22, 2011 Work
Session, Council expressed interest in further investigation of the Adverse Impact
Review (AIR) approach. Specific direction to staff was to:
• Continue development of the AIR criteria, standards and review process with an
expanded Working Committee
• Perform additional public outreach
• Bring the item for Council review at a future date.
Based on further research, continued public outreach, and the results from a technical
analysis completed at the request of the Working Committee, staff is recommending a
October 25, 2011
modified approach that will incorporate key aspects of AIR with the current floodplain
regulations. This approach provides the benefit of addressing life safety and property
damage considerations while avoiding the cost and time impacts associated with
requiring additional detailed floodplain analyses focused on determining increases in
flood elevations and velocities.
3. The City of Fort Collins’ Current, and Potential Future, Involvement in Supporting the
Provision of Social Services to the Citizens of the Community. (staff: Ken Waido; 1
hour discussion)
Many lower income citizens of Fort Collins need help in achieving the most basic human
needs of food and water for survival and clothing and shelter for protection from the
elements. But, there are other human needs beyond those physiological needs for
survival, including friendship and family, health, employment, self-esteem, morality, and
respect. When low income citizens lack the financial resources to meet these needs,
public support in providing affordable housing and social services is especially important
for survival and life enhancements. Most of the time, non-profit agencies and
organizations provide the needed housing and social services in the community with the
City of Fort Collins participating in a supporting role.
The City of Fort Collins has a history of allocating financial assistance to a variety of
agencies and organizations that provide the direct, hands-on social (public and human)
services to lower income people of the community. This work session will review what
the City is currently doing regarding supporting the provision of social services in the
community. Information will be presented as to the other entities currently involved in
providing, or supporting social services, such as Larimer County, the United Way of
Larimer County, Poudre Valley Health Systems, the Poudre School District, and
Colorado State University. A review of what other communities are doing will lead the
discussion as to whether the City’s current involvement is adequate or not, and if the role
is to change, what additional actions should the City undertake.
4. The City of Fort Collins’ Current and Potential Future Involvement in Early Childhood
Care and Education. (staff: Joe Frank, Tess Heffernan; 1 hour discussion)
Increasingly, communities across the nation are recognizing the many “triple bottom
line” benefits of accessible, affordable, and quality early childhood care and education.
Quality child care benefits the social and financial needs of parents, the educational and
development needs of children, the economy, and many other community development
goals. City Council asked for more information to help clarify the direction that it would
take in regard to the City’s role and potential strategies in regard to early childhood care
and education. This issue is part of Council’s 2011/2012 Work Plan.
5. Other Business.
6. Adjournment.
DATE: October 25, 2011
STAFF: Jon Haukaas, Ken
Sampley, Marsha Hilmes-Robinson,
Brian Varella
Pre-taped staff presentation: available
at fcgov.com/clerk/agendas.php
WORK SESSION ITEM
FORT COLLINS CITY COUNCIL
SUBJECT FOR DISCUSSION
Cache La Poudre River Floodplain Regulations.
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
A component of the Stormwater program review requested by City Council in October 2008
included a review of the level of regulation protecting life and property for areas within the Poudre
River floodplain. Floodplain regulation options have been presented and discussed at three (3)
Council work sessions. At the February 22, 2011 Work Session, Council expressed interest in
further investigation of the Adverse Impact Review (AIR) approach. Specific direction to staff was
to:
• Continue development of the AIR criteria, standards and review process with an expanded
Working Committee
• Perform additional public outreach
• Bring the item for Council review at a future date.
Based on further research, continued public outreach, and the results from a technical analysis
completed at the request of the Working Committee, staff is recommending a modified approach
that will incorporate key aspects of AIR with the current floodplain regulations. This approach
provides the benefit of addressing life safety and property damage considerations while avoiding
the cost and time impacts associated with requiring additional detailed floodplain analyses focused
on determining increases in flood elevations and velocities.
GENERAL DIRECTION SOUGHT AND SPECIFIC QUESTIONS TO BE ANSWERED
Given the importance of the Poudre River to the City of Fort Collins and its citizens:
1. Does City Council concur with the Staff recommendation that additional consideration be
given to implementing specific life safety and property damage criteria that will enhance and
support the existing floodplain regulations?
2. Upon review of the floodway surcharge analysis results, does City Council agree with the
elimination of the additional detailed engineering analyses, notification and mitigation
requirements originally proposed with the AIR approach?
October 25, 2011 Page 2
3. Is it acceptable to combine the additional Poudre River life safety and property damage
criteria along with mandated Colorado Water Conservation Board (CWCB) revisions to
Citywide floodplain regulations and present both for formal Council action in March 2012?
BACKGROUND / DISCUSSION
City Council requested a review of the Stormwater program in October 2008. Staff identified a list
of issues to be addressed that included a review of the level of regulation protecting life and property
for areas within the Poudre River floodplain. It is the City’s duty and responsibility to manage
foreseeable risks to protect current and future citizens from physical, financial, and emotional
impacts of flooding
Elements and Purpose of Floodplain Administration
The elements of floodplain administration consist of:
• Protect life-safety and property from the effects of flooding through proactive regulation,
emergency response and long-term planning
• Encourage sustainable construction practices that reduce burdens on future generations
• Reduce clean-up costs created by flood-damaged structures and property, minimizing the
volume of landfill wastes
• Reduce communitywide disruptions of commerce, livelihood and services.
Problem Statement
The Poudre River floods. Unless mitigated, development in the floodplain can result in adverse
flooding impacts. The current Poudre River Floodplain Regulations do not include requirements that
specifically address the following issues:
• Increased risk to human life and safety as a result of more people working within the 100-
year floodplain and increased risk to life and safety for emergency services workers and first
responders during flooding events.
• Impacts (as a result of increased flooding depths and velocities) of redirected flood waters
on adjacent, upstream and downstream properties within the existing 100-year floodplain
and properties that would be within an expanded 100-year floodplain resulting from new
development/redevelopment.
• Increased preservation of natural and beneficial functions of the floodplain including
minimized loss of riparian habitat, periodic “flushing” of sediment and debris to retain flood
conveyance and promote benthic species growth, provision of a buffer area for lateral
channel migration and increased natural water quality treatment, and groundwater recharge.
October 25, 2011 Page 3
The current regulations focus almost exclusively on protecting new structures from flooding
damage. Without additional requirements, the current 0.5 foot allowable floodway rise allows
potential adverse impacts to other property owners.
Adverse Impact Review
At the February 22, 2011 Council Work Session, staff was directed to pursue the Adverse Impact
Review (AIR) option as a possible revision to the Poudre River floodplain regulations. The current
regulations allow non-residential development within the 100-year flood fringe on the Poudre River
that meets specific criteria (i.e., freeboard, property use, etc.). Under these existing regulations, the
impacts caused by such development are not analyzed.
Staff developed the AIR option to permit non-residential development in the 100-year Poudre River
floodplain only if adverse impacts of the development on adjacent, downstream and/or upstream
properties can be either entirely avoided or adequately mitigated according to established criteria.
The criteria were developed with the goal of balancing the competing economic, environmental, and
public safety values of the Fort Collins community.
Working Committee
A citizen Working Committee of business and property owners, environmental stewards,
engineering professionals and interested parties was established initially in January 2011 to provide
feedback on the floodplain regulations to Council. The Working Committee met three times prior
to the February 22, 2011 Council Work Session. The Working Committee met three more times
over the summer and formed a Technical Subcommittee to develop data in response to concerns
regarding the magnitude of the issues identified in the problem statement.
The Working Committee requested that the Technical Subcommittee:
1. Analyze and provide specific information for key areas of the Poudre River to identify
properties and structures that could be subjected to increased flooding (i.e., velocities and
depths) from development and/or redevelopment within the Poudre River 100-year
Floodplain. This analysis is subsequently referred to as the “Floodway Surcharge
Analysis”; and,
2. Compare the existing regulations and proposed AIR process to evaluating its applicability
for evaluating life safety and property damage. This is subsequently referred to as the “Life
Safety / Damage Reduction / Property Rights Evaluation.”
Technical Advisory Committee
A Technical Advisory Committee (TAC) consisting of City staff from various departments and
divisions was established to provide input, feedback and guidance on the floodplain regulations and
the Adverse Impact Review approach. The TAC’s role was to evaluate the regulations and AIR
approach based on their respective professional expertise and department vision and mission while
utilizing a triple bottom line (TBL) philosophy that includes economic, social and environmental
considerations.
October 25, 2011 Page 4
Stormwater staff presented the results of the analysis completed by the Technical Subcommittee and
facilitated a discussion of the results to obtain TAC input and feedback on the floodplain regulations
and AIR process.
Adverse Impact Review -- Evaluation of Approach
The AIR approach and potential implementation was evaluated through the combination of a
Floodway Surcharge Analysis and Life Safety / Damage Reduction / Property Rights Evaluation.
Floodway Surcharge Analysis
Goal: Identify flooding impacts that allowable (under current regulations) development
will have on life safety and existing properties and structures along the Poudre River
from just above College Avenue downstream to Timberline Road and determine if
these impacts are of the magnitude and significance to support migrating to an
adverse impact review approach for floodplain management.
Approach: Quantify the potential impacts of the allowable rise (floodway surcharge) associated
with the current effective 100-Year ½-ft floodway model.
Results: Attachments 1 through 3 to this memo provide maps that illustrate the increase in
flood elevation and corresponding expansion of the 100-Year floodplain associated
with the maximum allowable rise under the current floodplain regulations. Key results
of impact to other properties as a result of filling in the flood fringe include:
• Loss of the flood fringe due to the placement of fill will result in an increase in
flow velocity during flooding conditions. However, these increases are not likely
to cause significant erosion or sediment transport beyond the existing 100-yr
flooding conditions;
• Changes in floodplain width were generally negligible with the exception of the
Link N Greens and North College areas. The Poudre River basin is largely
confined by the natural bluff on the Old Town Side (right bank, near Riverside),
and by man-made features on the left bank (Mulberry Street, Lemay Avenue);
• The Allowable Rise resulting from filling the floodplain is typically less than the
maximum permissible 0.5 ft throughout much of the reach of Poudre River basin
studied. The greatest potential increase in floodplain rise was near College
Avenue;
• Five (5) existing structures were identified that would be impacted and subjected
to a 100-Year flood event as result of filling in the flood fringe. Impacts include:
N Potential increase in damages
N Flood insurance will be mandatory if there are loans on the properties
N Properties will be subject to the City Code Chapter 10 floodplain
regulations.
October 25, 2011 Page 5
• One hundred and twenty-two (122) existing structures in the Poudre River
floodplain will potentially be subject to higher flood elevations ranging from 1/2-
inch to 6-inch plus the increased velocities associated with this flow;
• The College Avenue crossing area has the greatest potential risk due to increased
roadway overtopping. The surcharge may increase the flood elevation by an
additional 6 inches across College Avenue (from 18 inches to 24 inches);
significantly increasing the life-safety risk to the traveling public;
• The bridge for North College Avenue across the Poudre River has a moderate
increase in risk due to pressure flow on the bridge face, increasing bridge
washout scour potential, and a greater impact on the structure from debris; and
• Lemay Avenue has moderate risk of overtopping and flooding the Mulberry /
Lemay intersection and areas near the Home Depot and Walmart since the flood
elevation is 0.5 ft below the lowest overtopping elevation of the roadway, and
allowable rises would reduce this overtopping to within 0.2 ft of the lowest point
of the roadway.
Life Safety / Damage Reduction / Property Rights Evaluation
Goal: The over-riding purpose of floodplain regulations is to protect life-safety. If additional
people are working and acquiring services in the floodplain, there is a corresponding
increase in potential evacuation and rescue. This not only places the employees and
customers at risk but also the emergency response personnel performing rescue
operations. Protection of property is an issue not only for the new properties being
proposed to be built, but for existing properties. Debris generated by structures being
damaged or floatable materials being swept off-site can cause increased damage to
downstream properties and often cause debris blockages at bridges. The goal of this
analysis is to compare the existing regulations and proposed AIR Review process to
evaluate their applicability for addressing life safety and property damage.
Approach: Develop a matrix to provide a qualitative assessment of how the current regulations
and AIR process compare with respect to key considerations
Results: Attachment 4 to this memo illustrates the matrix created to assess how the current
regulations and AIR process compare in addressing life safety, property damage
reduction, and property rights issues. The matrix shows that the current regulations
either did not consider, or only minimally considered the following criteria:
• Risk to workers, customers, delivery people, etc. during a 100-year flood event
• Safe access for emergency personnel during an event
• Emergency warning and evacuation plans
• Blockage of existing bridge, culvert and stream improvements
• Notification to impacted property owners.
The matrix shows that the current regulations do consider, to a significant degree, the following
criteria:
October 25, 2011 Page 6
• Flood damage resistant materials
• Structure design for new development in the floodplain
• Freeboard.
Attachment 5 provides a tabular listing and comparison of the criteria originally proposed for
evaluation in conjunction with the AIR process and those proposed with a modified approach that
combines the current floodplain regulations with specific key life safety and property damage
considerations. Staff believes it is appropriate to incorporate the consideration of life safety and
property damage criteria into the regulations in conjunction with the upcoming process to adopt
revisions to the floodplain regulations based on the Colorado Water Conservation Board (CWCB)
approved Floodplain Rules and Regulations for the State of Colorado. Those revisions have not yet
been brought forth to prevent confusion with the Poudre River floodplain regulations discussion.
Background on these necessary revisions is included as Attachment 6.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION
Based on the results from the technical analyses, staff concluded that a comprehensive AIR review
process that requires a detailed engineering analysis of changes in flood elevations and velocities
and their impact on adjacent properties is not appropriate for all development situations in the
Poudre River floodplain. It is therefore the recommendation of staff that additional consideration
be given to implementing specific life safety and property damage criteria that will enhance and
support the existing floodplain regulations. These criteria should be presented in combination with
the mandated Colorado Water Conservation Board (CWCB) revisions to Citywide floodplain
regulations for formal Council action in March 2012.
Staff will partner with the Poudre Fire Authority to research and develop specific life safety and
property damage criteria that would enhance and support the current regulations, focusing on:
• Emergency Access and risk to new persons in the floodplain
• Emergency evacuation and warning plans
• Blockages and Damming.
PUBLIC OUTREACH
Feedback from both the citizen Working Committee and TAC support the recommendation of staff
that there are opportunities in the future to improve specific life-safety standards as a valuable
complement to the current regulations. This approach is also supported by the Office of Emergency
Management of the Poudre Fire Authority. Support was voiced for the need to prepare proactive
safety management and emergency warning plans that address escape routes for employees and/or
customers and also for developing criteria to require access routes for emergency workers. Perhaps
“dryland access” requirements could be modified to allow safe but “wet” access through areas
without significant flow (backwater flooding areas).
BOARD/COMMISSION RECOMMENDATIONS
The results of the Floodway Surcharge Analysis and Life Safety / Damage Reduction / Property
Rights Evaluation, feedback from the Working Committee and Technical Advisory Committee, and
the staff recommendation to pursue a modified approach consisting of the existing Poudre River
October 25, 2011 Page 7
Floodplain Regulations in combination with specific life-safety and property damage reduction
criteria were presented to both the Water Board (September 15, 2011) and Natural Resources
Advisory Board (September 21, 2011).
Water Board
Staff presented the information and responded to questions from the Board. Due to the complexity
of the subject matter, a significant amount of time was spent re-visiting floodplain concepts. Staff
also summarized the existing requirements outlined in the currently-adopted Poudre Floodplain
Regulations. There was extensive discussion of the technical analyses prepared in conjunction with
the Working Committee effort. The Board noted the importance of life safety and property damage
reduction as guiding floodplain management principles. Concern was expressed, however, that
more emphasis should be placed on environmental considerations. The Board then discussed
whether this emphasis should be included as a requirement in the Floodplain Management or Land
Use sections of City Code. Attachment 7 contains an excerpt of the minutes from the September
15, 2011 Water Board meeting. The Water Board recommendation includes language stressing the
need to increase preservation of natural and beneficial functions of the Poudre River floodplain as
shown below:
“The Water Board recommends the existing floodplain regulations be retained, but
that additional consideration to implementing specific life safety and property
damage criteria and increased preservation of natural and beneficial functions of the
floodplain that would enhance and support the current regulations be incorporated
with the process to adopt the new Floodplain Rules and Regulations for the State of
Colorado as approved by the Colorado Water Conservation Board (CWCB).”
Natural Resources Advisory Board (NRAB)
Staff presented the information and responded to questions from the Board. Based on questions
received at the Water Board regarding floodplain concepts, staff spent additional time reviewing and
explaining floodplain concepts and the existing requirements outlined in the currently-adopted
Poudre Floodplain Regulations. The technical analyses prepared in conjunction with the Working
Committee effort were discussed in detail. Similar to the Water Board discussion, the NRAB Board
noted the importance of life safety and property damage reduction as guiding floodplain
management principles. The Board reviewed and discussed the previous NRAB recommendation,
which indicated a preference for Option #2 (Revise the floodplain regulations to not allow any new
structures in the 100-Year floodplain). The Board expressed strong concern that development of
property within the Poudre River floodplain will adversely affect the natural and beneficial functions
of the River. There was concern that the economic benefits of this development will have negative
long term financial impacts on the City if the Poudre River is not protected and preserved. After
considerable discussion, the Board felt that its original recommendation was still applicable.
Attachment 8 contains the NRAB formal recommendation which is summarized below:
“The NRAB understands economic growth is important to the City of Fort Collins
but considers the health of the Poudre river also an important economic factor to the
City. The NRAB previously recommended Option #2 to Council in December, 2010
that new structures not be allowed in the Poudre River floodplain. This motion
reinforces the NRAB’s previous recommendation that Option #2 is still the best
October 25, 2011 Page 8
option from the Natural Resources perspective in order to protect the river and help
achieve the goals of the triple bottom line.”
ATTACHMENTS
1. Poudre River Floodway Surcharge Analysis – Overall Map
2. Poudre River Floodway Surcharge Analysis – Upstream and Downstream of College Avenue
3. Poudre River Floodway Surcharge Analysis – Linden Street to D/S (East) of Lemay Avenue
4. Life-Safety / Damage Reduction / Property Rights Evaluation
5. Criteria Comparison – AIR and Modified Approach
6. Colorado Water Conservation Board Revised Floodplain Rules and Regulations Background
7. Excerpt from draft Water Board Minutes, September 15, 2011 (Floodplain Regulations)
8. NRAB Formal Recommendation (Poudre River Floodplain Regulations)
9. Powerpoint presentation
10. Work Session Summary, February 22, 2011
11. Work Session Summary, January 11, 2011
12. Work Session Summary, August 24, 2010
13. Work Session Summary, December 8, 2009
Floodway Surcharge Analysis – Overall Map
Floodway Surcharge Analysis – North College
Floodway Surcharge Analysis – Link-N-Greens
Poudre River Floodplain Regulations
9/7/2011
Evaluation of Life-Safety, Damage Reduction,
and Neighboring Property Rights Protection Criteria
** Note – This does not include the technical criteria (depth and velocity) being evaluated
through additional quantitative analyses.
Scale: 0 (Not Considered) – 10 (Fully Considered)
Criteria Current Regulations Proposed AIR
Regulations
Risk to New Persons
Occupying the Floodplain
4
Current regulations
prohibit critical facilities
and new residential
structures.
7
Risk to workers and
customers of non-
residential structures.
Risk to Emergency
responders. Risk may be
mitigated by other criteria
such as dryland access,
emergency evacuation
plans, etc.
Dryland Access
0 8-10
Life-Safety Criteria
Emergency Warning and
Evacuation Plans
1-2
Currently considered
when floodproofing a
building.
6-7
Potential Debris
6
Current floatable
materials regulation.
7-8
Proposed regulation
would also address
fences, building being
damaged and generating
debris, etc.
Life-Safety and Flood
Damage Reduction
Criteria
Blockages and Damming
(Proposed fences, walls, rows of
trees, etc. Existing unmapped risk
upstream of bridges, railroad
crossings, etc.)
1 4-5
Flood Damage Resistant
Materials
6 7-8
Structure Design
4-5 7-8
Poudre River Floodplain Regulations
9/7/2011
Analysis of Impact on Other
Properties.
2
Analysis required if
doing a LOMR.
8
Mitigation of Impact on
Other Properties
1
Mitigation only required
if working in the
floodway and mitigation
only related to change in
flood elevation.
8
Public Notification
1
Minimal notification as
part of LOMR.
9-10
Neighboring Property Rights
Protection
Public Comment
3
Can comment through
P&Z for large projects.
9
Summary
Criteria Current Regulations Proposed AIR
Regulations
Life-Safety Criteria
2-3 7
Damage Reduction
Criteria
7 8
Neighboring Property
Rights Protection
1-2 8-9
Page 2 of 2
Poudre River Floodplain Regulations
9/7/2011
COMPARISON
Adverse Impact Review (AIR) Approach
vs.
Modified Approach
(Combination of Current Regulations plus
Life-Safety and Property Damage Considerations)
Criteria AIR Approach Modified Approach
Risk to New Persons
Occupying the Floodplain
X X
Emergency Access
X X
Life-Safety
Criteria
Emergency Warning and
Evacuation Plans
X X
Increase in Flood Elevation X
Increase in Velocity X
Increase in Erosion Potential X
Debris Potential X
Blockages and Damming
(Proposed fences, walls, rows of
trees, etc. Existing unmapped
risk upstream of bridges, railroad
crossings, etc.)
X X
Life-Safety and Flood
Damage Reduction Criteria
Structure Design
X X
Flood Damage
Reduction
Criteria
Flood Damage
Resistant Materials
X X
Analysis of Impact on Other
Properties.
X
Mitigation of Impact on Other
Properties
X
Neighboring
Property Rights
Protection
Public Notification
X
Poudre River Floodplain Regulations
9/7/2011
Revisions to City of Fort Collins Floodplain Regulations
(CWCB Rulemaking in November, 2010)
BACKGROUND
In November 2010, the Colorado Water Conservation Board (CWCB) approved the adoption and
implementation of new Floodplain Rules and Regulations for the State of Colorado.
Governmental entities are required to adopt floodplain regulations that meet or exceed those
established by the CWCB on or before January 14, 2014. While a majority of the floodplain
regulations currently in force within the City of Fort Collins meet or exceed the new
requirements, there are modifications that must be made to the existing regulations to be in
compliance, including but not limited to the following:
• A minimum of one foot of freeboard above the 100-Year Base Flood Elevation will
be required for the lowest floor elevation of residential and non-residential structures;
• Elimination of waiver to allow development within floodplains where City
improvements have resulted in floodplain modifications that have not yet been re-
mapped;
• All costs (including those for building floors above the first floor) must be included in
determining and applying rules with respect to substantial improvement for
development in all floodplains; and
• Enforcement of the City moderate-risk floodplain as currently designated.
These changes have not been included to date in the discussion regarding potential revisions to
the Poudre River floodplain regulations for the following reasons:
• They apply to all floodplains within the City and are not specific to the Poudre
River;
• They are not directly related to the implementation of an AIR approach to the Poudre
River; and
• There has been no public outreach to inform the community about the new
requirements.
Excerpt from Unapproved Water Board Minutes, September 15, 2011
Poudre River Floodplain Regulations
(Attachments available upon request).
Stormwater and Floodplain Program Manager Ken Sampley presented information on this item
and stated this item will also be presented to the Natural Resources Advisory Board. Ms. Hilmes-
Robinson was also available to answer questions concerning the regulations. Mr. Sampley
presented background information on the Poudre River as a flood threat. Since it is the largest
watershed in the city, the flood risk is greater because of rain, snow melt, and rain-on-snow
storm events.
Purpose of Poudre River Floodplain Regulations Review
This is one aspect of the stormwater repurposing effort. It is the City’s duty and responsibility to
manage foreseeable risks to protect current and future citizens from the impacts of flooding.
Problem Statement Summarized
Unless mitigated, development in the floodplain can result in adverse flooding impacts. The
current regulations do not include requirements that specifically address increased risk to human
life and safety, impacts of redirected flood waters, and increased preservation of natural and
beneficial functions of the floodplain. The current regulations focus primarily on protecting new
structures from flooding damage.
Floodplain Regulation Options
Mr. Sampley listed the four options for the board to consider.
Board discussion:
Can you remind us what the board initially recommended? The board recommended staff look
at Option #2 which states, the Poudre River floodplain regulations be revised to not allow any
new structures in the 100-year floodplain. This recommendation was made in 2010.
Did the Adverse Impact Review (AIR) involve the change in velocity? The AIR involved no
change in velocity or erosion.
Mr. Sampley stated this item was presented at the February 22, 2011 Council Work Session.
Council expressed interest in further investigation of the AIR approach with an expanded
Working Committee. The Working Committee consisted of property and business owners,
engineers, developers, environmental stewards, and staff. Staff developed the potential AIR
Review Criteria and Review Process with input from the Working Committee.
Several of the committee members questioned the Problem Statement. A technical subcommittee
was established as a result of this. This subcommittee looked at a floodway surcharge analysis as
well as life safety, damage reduction, and property rights evaluation criteria. The subcommittee
utilized City staff to provide input, feedback, and guidance on the floodplain regulations and the
AIR from a multi-disciplinary perspective. Utilities also evaluated this based on the Triple
Bottom Line (TBL) philosophy which includes economic, social, and environmental
considerations.
Mr. Sampley explained the model for the Floodway Surcharge Analysis. The goal of this model
is to identify flooding impacts that allowable developments will have on life safety and
determine if these impacts are of the magnitude and significance to support migrating to an AIR
approach for floodplain management. The model shows a maximum 6 inch floodway rise;
however, not all the cross sections are at 6 inches.
Board discussion:
What are the assumptions with the model? Are you assuming that every piece of land in the flood
fringe is developed and filled in? To develop the original floodway limits, the water surface
elevation is raised six inches. However, in this model, the surcharges from a Federal Emergency
Management Agency (FEMA) model were plugged into the cross section.
Is a portion of the flood fringe filled? The purpose of the surcharge model was to determine
impacts of the water surface elevation increases. This will make the floodway expand wider.
This model assumes no changes to the floodplain from stormwater mediation projects? There is
no capital projects proposed in this region. When the floodplain widens, there is an opportunity
to impact other properties that are not currently in the floodplain.
A board member asked for clarification on the cross section with the 3.8 inch rise versus the 5.5
inch rise. Ms. Hilmes-Robinson stated the model can be changed. The maximum is a six inch
rise, but each time the model is changed, the numbers will vary some.
The current regulations allow a 6 inch rise. What is allowable for the developer? A developer
does not have to conduct an analysis for building outside the floodplain or the floodway. Ms.
Hilmes-Robinson stated the purpose of the model is to predetermine what could happen with
developments. Mr. Sampley stated this is a very preliminary look.
A board member asked for clarification on topology changes concerning the rise. The maximum
is six inches.
A board member asked for clarification on whether fill was used on the property where the
Northside Aztlan Community Center was constructed. Ms. Hilmes-Robinson stated this structure
was not constructed on fill.
A board member asked for clarification if a new development with a six inch rise caused an
eleven inch rise at a different point along the floodway. Mr. Sampley stated that because of the
topology, the development would not cause a six inch rise.
If someone downstream builds a development, do they not have to cause a six inch rise? If a
developer builds outside the floodway, they do not have to quantify the impact.
A board member asked for clarification on what would happen if new developments were
constructed in the floodway. Ms. Holmes-Robinson drew a diagram explaining what would
happen if new developments were constructed in the referenced area.
Mr. Sampley gave a summary of the floodway surcharge analysis:
• Area added to the 100 year floodplain:
Total = 8.88 acres
Link-N-Greens only = 7.08 acres
• Number of structures not currently in the 100 year floodplain that would be subject to the
expanded (wider and deeper) 100-year floodplain = 5
• Number of structures currently in the 100-year floodplain that would experience an
increase in water surface elevation = 122 (up to six inches)
Board discussion:
Does that increase flood insurance? No, because most of the 122 buildings are older structures.
Future developments would need to look at elevating the structures to remove them from the
floodplain.
A board member expressed concern about the older buildings and feels these structures are just
as important as newer structures. Mr. Holmes-Robinson stated that the statement concerning the
older buildings came from the working committee and property owners. There are some
residential structures; however, most of the structures are commercial.
A board member asked for clarification on velocity in the area. Ms. Holmes-Robinson explained
the Product Corridor Equation (depth times velocity greater than or equal to 6).
The current regulations allow 18 inches of water? No, that is the existing condition. Currently,
the water overtops College Avenue and Vine Drive without any further developments.
Are you assuming the current rainfall criteria? The Poudre River does not use rainfall criteria in
the mapping.
Mr. Sampley gave a summary of the life safety, damage reduction, and property rights evaluation
criteria. This was a separate process in addition to the technical analysis. The goal is to compare
the existing regulations and proposed AIR review process to evaluating their applicability for
evaluating life safety and property damage.
Board discussion:
A board member asked for clarification concerning if someone wants to develop in the area,
whether they have to conduct an analysis of the floodplain? No, they are not required to do an
analysis if they are in the flood fringe. Mr. Haukaas stated by identifying the floodway and flood
fringe, the analysis has already been conducted.
Mr. Sampley gave a summary of the results. The matrix shows the current regulations either did
not consider, or only minimally considered the following criteria:
• Risk to workers, customers, delivery people, etc. during a 100-year flood event;
• Safe access for emergency personnel during an event;
• Emergency warning and evacuation plans;
• Blockage of existing bridge, culvert, and stream improvements; and
• Notification to potentially impacted property owners
The matrix shows that the current regulations do consider, to a significant degree, the following
criteria:
• Flood damage resistant materials
• Structure design for new development in the floodplain
• Freeboard
Mr. Sampley gave a summary of the recommendations from the working committee. Staff
considered the possibility of requiring if a new development should conduct a technical
engineering analysis to determine the increase in velocity. Since part of the impact has already
been indentified, it does not seem appropriate for an additional analysis to be conducted;
however, when an analysis is not conducted, the opportunity is lost to provide notice to some of
the properties. Staff believes emergency access and emergency evacuation and warning plans
should be reviewed to improve the current regulations. During the process, staff also
incorporated technical guidance such as ineffective flow and conveyance shadowing.
Mr. Sampley gave a summary of the recommendations from the technical advisory committee.
Staff met separately with the Poudre Fire Authority (PFA). They are very interested in regards to
implementing specific life safety and property damage criteria. They also desire to focus and
improve coordination of City departments to better consider life safety and property damage
considerations including street layouts and zoning.
Mr. Sampley gave a summary of the revisions to the floodplain regulations. In November 2010,
the Colorado Water Conservation Board (CWCB) approved new floodplain rules and
regulations. In January 2014, local governments will be required to adopt floodplain regulations
that meet or exceed the new requirements.
Board discussion:
What is a moderate risk floodplain? In some instances, the 500-year floodplain is mapped; in
other instances, shallow flooding is mapped. This is not currently regulated. Some areas will now
be required to have a floodplain use permit.
Does the map show the 500-year floodplain? No, this map does not show the 500-year
floodplain. Mr. Haukaas stated today’s discussion does not have an impact on the 500-year
floodplain; however, these issues will be discussed with the board at a later time.
Mr. Sampley gave a summary of the conclusions. He stated it does not seem necessary to require
an additional engineering analysis to quantify the impacts; however, staff believes that specific
life safety and property damage criteria could be combined with current floodplain regulations to
enhance regulations.
Mr. Sampley gave a summary of staff’s recommendations, which include retaining existing
floodplain regulations, but also to consider implementing specific life safety and property
damage criteria that would enhance the current regulations. Recommendations also include
partnering with PFA to develop criteria concerning emergency access, evacuation, and
blockages. Staff also recommends incorporating the criteria into the regulations required by the
CWCB.
Board discussion:
You can fill in the entire flood fringe and it doesn’t raise the water level along the mapped
corridor more than 5.9 inches? Yes, that is correct.
What defines the floodway limits? The concept behind the floodway is to preserve an area with
the highest risks. This is based on the fact that historically, individuals and businesses like to
build near creeks and rivers.
Chairperson Janett stated she feels protection of the natural floodplain as well as the
environmental component (as part of the TBL analysis) has not been taken into consideration.
Mr. Sampley stated development cannot happen in the floodway without a Conditional Letter of
Map Revision (CLOMR) or Letter of Map Revision (LOMR).
If you are filling in the floodplain, you are increasing the speed of the water. The water will be
channeled instead of going through a wide area. How can we develop the flood fringe exercise?
Mr. Haukaas stated when Utilities started looking at the AIR process, Utilities looked at a worst
case scenario. The area is still going to flood, but the overbank has some advantages. The impact
of a worst case scenario is pretty minimal. There are commonalities from the AIR process,
including increased evacuation, better dry land access, and public safety components.
Does the City plan to enhance and maintain the models over time? Are you proactively looking
at properties where development could occur with potential safety issues? Is the City going to
plan out recommendations if a development does occur? Yes, Utilities will continually try to
improve the mapping. The federal grant process will re-map the area to obtain better data. Until
the development happens, Utilities does not know specifically on the map where they will be
located.
Is it possible to address the flood fringe in the same way as a landscape requirement? This
analysis does not take the Poudre River buffer into account. Ms. Hilmes-Robinson stated the
Poudre River buffer is a natural areas buffer. The area defined as a buffer depends on important
features in the area, such as an eagle’s nest or wetlands. In some places the areas are wider than
the floodway. In other places they are within the floodway.
Is the Link-N-Greens property outside the buffer zone? Yes.
Could the buffer be within the floodway? Yes, in certain places.
What is the current regulation for the floodway? The current regulation is for a 6-inch floodway.
This matches the current Larimer County regulation.
Ms. Hilmes-Robinson stated there is a whole series of criteria relating to the structure. Most of
the criteria are related to property protection of the structures. This is because floodplain
regulations were originally developed for the purpose of reducing payouts from flood insurance.
No residential structures or critical facilities are allowed in the 100-year floodplain.
Will you change the floodway and floodplain limits when you re-map? Would property be
grandfathered in? No, property in the floodplain would not be grandfathered in. It would be
subject to the new floodway requirements.
How much did the modeling cost? The modeling cost approximately $7,000-8,000.
A board member questioned the statement from the problem statement concerning increased
preservation of natural and beneficial functions of the floodplain. Mr. Sampley stated this is
covered by the requirements in the City Code concerning the natural areas buffer; however, it is
not indentified in the floodplain portion of the Code.
The board member suggested this should not be part of the problem statement.
Chairperson Janett stated that more floodplain regulations will be presented to the board at
later times. The City had a 0.1 rise on the books for eight years, from 2000 to 2008, and chose to
relax their standard in 2008. The board may choose the option for a lesser rise in the future.
Also, the board is scheduled to hear an item on the state’s modeling for Climate Change. Due to
the potential for greater flooding frequency and higher magnitude storms, today’s 100-year
flood fringe may not be the same as what it will be 30 years in the future.
Mr. Sampley reiterated the staff recommendation which states the existing floodplain regulations
be retained, but that additional consideration be given to implementing specific criteria, which
are similar to the AIR criteria. This would be a modified approach.
Board discussion:
A board member stated the recommendation does not consider the environmental aspect in the
regulations. Chairperson Janett stated the motion wording can be modified to include a
statement for the environmental aspect.
What is wrong with cross referencing the flood regulations with some of the environmental
regulations in the City Code? Perhaps a gap analysis can be done concerning this. Mr. Sampley
requested Deputy City Attorney Carrie Daggett respond to this question. Ms. Daggett stated the
Land Use Code requirements contain information that applies to development activities. The
Land Use Code contains a definition of development; however, there is a broader definition of
development in Chapter 10 of the City Code. In relating to floodplain management and effects on
flood flows, there legally would be room to have requirements in Chapter 10. She stressed it is
important to think about the relationship in terms of the floodplain provisions. Ms. Hilmes-
Robinson stated the code language is not void of any code that talks about velocity and erosion
issues. The Land Use Code and Chapter 10 include provisions concerning this.
Board Member Brunswig requested a friendly amendment to staff’s recommended motion.
The motion did not carry.
Discussion on the motion:
Chairperson Janett asked for clarification on what Board Member Brunswig means by “not be
retained.” Board Member Brunswig stated that she wants the environmental aspect to be
considered since the other aspects are being considered.
Board Member Goldbach requested a friendly amendment to the motion. She suggested building
the motion around the fact that the AIR might not be worth the expense.
The motion was not seconded. The motion does not carry.
Mr. Sampley stated the AIR approach as originally proposed included all of the considerations
identified in Attachments 5 and 6 to the Poudre River Floodplain Regulations AIS as well as the
determination of impacts to base flood elevations, velocities, and erosion potential. However,
based on the results from the Floodway Surcharge Analysis, a comprehensive AIR review
process that requires a detailed engineering analysis of changes in flood elevations and velocities
and their impact on adjacent properties is not appropriate for all development situations in the
Poudre River floodplain. Staff believes that incorporating specific life safety and property
damage reduction criteria in combination with the existing floodplain regulations will address the
key common considerations associated with public safety.
Board Member Brown requested a friendly amendment to staff’s recommended motion. He liked
the motion language, but would like to modify it slightly to include the environmental
consideration. He would like the floodplain to function in its natural capacity.
Amended Motion: Board Member Brunswig moved that the Water Board recommend that
the existing floodplain regulations not be retained until Council considers environmental
aspects of the Triple Bottom Line analysis of the Poudre River regulations and include
protection of the natural processes of the floodplain.
Board discussion:
A board member feels it would be valuable to hear comments from members of the Natural
Resources Advisory Board after the item is presented to them.
Ms. Hilmes-Robinson asked the board if there are specific criteria they are looking at that might
help guide staff in the right direction.
A board member stated the new AIR process seemed to focus on processes to protect structures.
He is interested in the methods available to address the beneficial aspects of the floodway for
presentation to the board.
Chairperson Janett stated the working committee was predominantly composed of business
developers and real estate individuals. She feels there is plenty of expertise available on the
subject for future discussion.
Vote on the motion: It passed unanimously.
Amended Motion: Board Member Brown move the Water Board recommend the existing
floodplain regulations be retained, but that additional consideration to implementing
specific life safety and property damage criteria and increased preservation of natural and
beneficial functions of the floodplain that would enhance and support the current
regulations be incorporated with the process to adopt the new Floodplain Rules and
Regulations for the State of Colorado as approved by the Colorado Water Conservation
Board (CWCB). Board Member Gessler seconded the motion.
Natural Resources
215 N. Mason
PO Box 580
Fort Collins, CO 80522
970.221-6600
970.224-6177 - fax
fcgov.com
MEMORANDUM
FROM THE CITY OF FORT COLLINS
NATURAL RESOURCES ADVISORY BAORD
Date: October 6, 2011
To: Mayor and Council Members
From: Liz Pruessner on behalf of the Natural Resources Advisory Board
Subject: Poudre River Floodplain Regulations
The NRAB considered all the new information on the floodplain regulations presented at our meeting on
September 21, 2011. The City was correct in the decision to develop more information by initiating the
Citizen Working Committee and the Technical Advisory Committee to analyze existing floodplain
regulations and conduct the Adverse Impact Review. The committees were also asked to consider the
Triple Bottom Line in their analysis. This is a complex issue and the new information that was gained in
the process proved most beneficial. Development in the floodplain can cause adverse impacts and this
process revealed deficiencies that our existing floodplain regulations do not address including:
o Increased risk to human life and safety (workers, customers, emergency responders, etc.);
o Impacts (as a result of increased flooding depths and velocities) of redirected flood
waters; and
o Increased preservation of natural and beneficial functions of the floodplain.
While the NRAB certainly supports the staff recommendation that additional consideration should be
given to implementing specific life safety and property damage criteria that would enhance and support
the current regulations, we feel the best way to accomplish the goals of protecting life, safety, property
and the health of the Poudre River is not to allow development to encroach into the floodplain. There are
threats to existing structures in the floodplain and it makes no sense to add to the risk by allowing more
structures to be built.
City Plan spells out principles designed to minimize the risk while supporting the long term health of the
river:
Principle ENV 26: The City will manage the Poudre River floodplain to minimize potentially
hazardous conditions while promoting natural processes associated with flooding, erosion and
channel migration to occur over time as appropriate.
Encroaching into the floodplain does not support the sustainability of the river or the community.
The NRAB feels that the staff recommendation does not focus enough attention on the environmental
considerations of the triple bottom line analysis. The NRAB understands the importance of economic
growth to the City of Fort Collins, but considers the health of the Poudre River also a vitally important
economic factor to the City. Maintaining a healthy flowing river is in the long term economic interests of
the City. Numerous studies have shown the value of the river, our Natural Areas and trails to the local
economy.
2
The NRAB previously recommended Option #2 to Council in December, 2010 that new structures not be
allowed in the Poudre River floodplain. This motion reinforces the NRAB’s previous recommendation
that:
Option #2: The Poudre River floodplain regulations be revised to not allow any new structures in
the 100-Year floodplain is still the best option from the Natural Resources perspective in order to
protect the river and help achieve the goals of the triple bottom line.
This vote was unanimous.
For reference, we enclose our motion from December 2010 with this memo.
Please feel free to contact me regarding the NRAB’s comments on this issue.
Respectfully Submitted,
Liz Pruessner, Chair
Natural Resources Advisory Board
cc: Darin Attebury, City Manager
John Stokes, Director, Natural Resources Dept.
Susie Gordon, Staff Liaison
1
Poudre River Floodplain Regulations
Potential Revisions
City Council Work Session
October 25, 2011
Jon Haukaas, P.E.
Water Engineering Field
Operations Manager
Brian Varrella, P.E., CFM
Floodplain Administrator
Ken Sampley, P.E.
Stormwater and Floodplain
Program Manager
Marsha Hilmes-Robinson, CFM
Floodplain Administrator
2
1. Does City Council concur with the Staff
recommendation that additional consideration
be given to implementing specific life safety
and property damage criteria that will enhance
and support the existing floodplain
regulations?
General Direction / Specific Questions
Page 1 of 22
3
2. Upon review of the floodway surcharge
analysis results, does City Council agree with
the elimination of the additional detailed
engineering analyses, notification and
mitigation requirements originally proposed
with the AIR approach?
General Direction / Specific Questions
4
3. Is it acceptable to combine the additional
Poudre River life safety and property damage
criteria along with mandated Colorado Water
Conservation Board (CWCB) revisions to City-
wide floodplain regulations and present both
for formal Council action in March 2012?
General Direction / Specific Questions
Page 2 of 22
5
The Poudre River is a Flood Threat
Poudre is the largest
watershed in the city
– Drains 1,537 square
miles of land into Fort
Collins
– Generates a peak flow
of 13,300 cfs and
velocities over 13 fps
– Can flood for days or
weeks vs. hours in
other basins
– Floods can be caused
by rain, snowmelt, and
rain-on-snow storm
1904 Poudre River flood. High water events
mark on homes in Andersonville.
6
Purpose of Poudre River
FloodplainReview Floodplain Regulations Review
– Review of Floodplain Regulations is one aspect
of the Stormwater Repurposing effort.
– There is a flood risk on the Poudre River
• Existing properties in the Poudre floodplain are
already at risk
• The goal is to not increase this risk for the future
– It is the City’s duty and responsibility to manage
foreseeable risks to protect current and future
citizens from physical, financial, and emotional
impacts of flooding
Page 3 of 22
7
PROBLEM STATEMENT -- Summarized
The Poudre River floods. Unless mitigated, development
in the floodplain can result in adverse flooding impacts.
The current Poudre River Floodplain Regulations do not
include requirements that specifically address:
– Increased risk to human life and safety (workers,
customers, emergency responders, etc.);
– Impacts (as a result of increased flooding depths and
velocities) of redirected flood waters; and
– Increased preservation of natural and beneficial functions
of the floodplain.
The current regulations focus almost exclusively on
protecting new structures from flooding damage.
Poudre River Floodplain Regulations
8
Option #1: The Poudre River floodplain regulations
be revised to adopt a 0.1 foot rise floodway; OR
Option #2: The Poudre River floodplain regulations
be revised to not allow any new structures in the
100-Year floodplain; OR
Option #3: No change to the Poudre River floodplain
regulations (null alternative); OR
Option #4: Allow all non-residential development that
meets proposed Adverse Impact Review (AIR)
Criteria
Floodplain Regulation Options
Page 4 of 22
9
Feb 22 2011 Council Work Session
Council expressed interest in further
investigation of the AIR approach
Specific direction to Staff:
– Continue development of the AIR criteria, standards
and review process with an expanded Working
Committee;
– Perform additional public outreach; and,
– Bring the item for Council review at a future
(TBD) Council Work
Poudre River Floodplain Regulations
10
Working Committee (Citizens)
• Established in January 2011. Three (3) meetings
prior to Feb 22, 2011 Council Work Session
• Property/business owners, engineers,
developers, environmental stewards, FCU Staff
• Staff developed potential AIR Review Criteria
and Review Process with input from Working
Committee (Presented on Feb. 22, 2011)
• Committee members expressed concerns with
AIR Criteria and Review Process
Poudre River Floodplain Regulations
Page 5 of 22
11
Working Committee (Citizens)
• Meetings on June 13, 2011
July 11, 2011
August 22, 2011
• Committee Members questioned the
Problem Statement
• Established a technical subcommittee
– Floodway surcharge analysis
– Life Safety / Damage Reduction / Property
Rights Evaluation Criteria
Poudre River Floodplain Regulations
12
Technical Advisory Committee
• Utilize City staff to provide input, feedback
and guidance on the floodplain regulations
and the Adverse Impact Review from a multi-
disciplinary perspective.
Poudre Fire Authority Economic Dev Police
Advance Planning Natural Areas Engineering
Development Review Parks and Rec
• Evaluate based on a triple bottom line (TBL)
philosophy that includes economic, social
and environmental considerations.
Poudre River Floodplain Regulations
Page 6 of 22
13
Floodway Surcharge Analysis
GOAL
Identify flooding impacts that allowable (under current
regulations) development will have on life safety and
existing properties and structures along the Poudre
River and determine if these impacts are of the
magnitude and significance to support migrating to an
adverse impact review approach for floodplain
management.
APPROACH
Quantify the potential impacts of the allowable rise
(floodway surcharge) associated with the current
effective 100-Year ½-ft floodway model.
Poudre River Floodplain Regulations
14
0.5-ft Rise
Riparian Channel
Overbank
Riparian
Overbank
100-year Floodplain
Definitions – Floodplain and Floodway
Natural River at 1% Annual Chance Flood Stage
Fill
Material Flood
Fringe
0.5-ft Rise Floodway Flood
Fringe
Fill Material
BFE
Floodplain Concepts
Page 7 of 22
15
• A 6-inch floodway designates an area of a river
where encroachment is allowed to cause a
maximum rise of up to 6-inches.
– Optimized does not mean rise of 6.0 inches
globally
– Optimization meets multiple goals and intents
(more later)
• Usually not obvious to the casual observer
• Not tied to physical features in the field
• Hydraulic modeling considerations may only allow
for rises less than 6 inches in certain locations.
Floodway Concept
16
• Objective: The river needs to be modeled as a
whole, not just one cross section at a time.
• Common reasons 6-inch rise is not achievable:
1. Adjacent cross sections increase > 6 inches
2. Line smoothing changes boundary location
3. Negative surcharges
4. Unequal conveyance
5. Engineering expertise + experience
Maximum 6-6 -inch Rise Challenges
Page 8 of 22
17
18
Line Smoothing
Page 9 of 22
19
Line Smoothing
Equal Conveyance Reduction Example
Page 10 of 22
Less Than 6-6 -inch Rise
22
• A floodway boundary is not a physical feature
• It is ultimately up to the engineer to balance all
challenges – using technical expertise
• Optimized does not mean rise of 6.0 inches all
the time
• There are an infinite number of potential
encroachments in a floodway analysis
Floodway Conclusions
Page 11 of 22
23
Poudre River Floodplain Regulations
Floodway Surcharge Analysis -- Results
AIS Attachment 1
24
Poudre River Floodplain Regulations
Floodway Surcharge Analysis -- Results
AIS Attachment 2
Page 12 of 22
25
Poudre River Floodplain Regulations
Floodway Surcharge Analysis -- Results
AIS Attachment 3
26
SUMMARY
• Area added to the 100-Year floodplain:
• Total = 8.88 acres
• Link N Greens only = 7.08 acres
• Number of structures not currently in the 100-Year
floodplain that would be subject to the expanded
(wider and deeper) 100-Year floodplain = 5
• Number of structures currently in the 100-Year
floodplain that would experience an increase in
water surface elevation (and corresponding depth
of flooding) = 122 (up to 6 inches)
Poudre River Floodplain Regulations
FloodwayAnalysis Floodway Surcharge Analysis
Page 13 of 22
27
Life Safety / Damage Reduction / Property
Rights Evaluation Criteria
GOAL
Compare the existing regulations and proposed AIR
Review process to evaluating their applicability for
evaluating life safety and property damage
APPROACH
Develop a matrix to provide a qualitative assessment of
how the current regulations and AIR process compare
with respect to key considerations
Poudre River Floodplain Regulations
Results
Poudre River Floodplain Regulations
Life Safety / Damage / Property Rights
Evaluation of Life-Safety, Damage Reduction,
and Neighboring Property Rights Protection Criteria
** Note – This does not include the technical criteria (depth and velocity) being evaluated
through additional quantitative analyses.
Scale: 0 (Not Considered) – 10 (Fully Considered)
Criteria Current
Regulations
Proposed AIR
Regulations
Risk to New Persons
Occupying the Floodplain
4
Current regulations
prohibit critical
facilities and new
residential structures.
7
Risk to workers and
customers of non-
residential structures.
Risk to Emergency
responders. Risk may
be mitigated by other
criteria such as dryland
access, emergency
evacuation plans, etc.
Dryland Access
0 8-10
Life-Safety Criteria
Emergency Warning and
Evacuation Plans
1-2
Currently considered
when floodproofing a
building.
6-7
Potential Debris
6
Current floatable
materials regulation.
7-8
Proposed regulation
would also address
fences, building being
damaged and
29
Results
The matrix shows that the current regulations
either did not consider, or only minimally
considered the following criteria:
– Risk to workers, customers, delivery people, etc.
during a 100-year flood event;
– Safe access for emergency personnel during an
event;
– Emergency warning and evacuation plans;
– Blockage of existing bridge, culvert and stream
improvements; and,
– Notification to potentially impacted property owners
Poudre River Floodplain Regulations
Life Safety / Damage / Property Rights
30
Results
The matrix shows that the current regulations
do consider, to a significant degree, the
following criteria:
• Flood damage resistant materials
• Structure design for new development in the
floodplain
• Freeboard
Poudre River Floodplain Regulations
Life Safety / Damage / Property Rights
Page 15 of 22
31
Recommendations of Working Committee
• Use modified approach that retains existing
floodplain regulations but considers incorporation
of key aspects of AIR criteria (See below)
• Additional consideration should be given in the
future to implementing specific life safety and
property damage criteria that would enhance and
support the current regulations (i.e.)
• Emergency Access and risk to new persons
in the floodplain
• Emergency evacuation and warning plans
• Blockages and damming
• Incorporate Technical Guidance (Ineffective flow
and Conveyance Shadowing) into floodplain
administration process
Poudre River Floodplain Regulations
32
Recommendations of TAC
• Retain existing floodplain regulations (floodway
surcharge technical analysis indicated full
implementation of AIR approach is not justified)
• Poudre Fire Authority – Strong support for
implementing specific life safety and property
damage criteria that would enhance and support
the current regulations:
• Emergency Access and risk to new persons
in the floodplain
• Emergency evacuation and warning plans
• Blockages and damming
• Debris reduction
Poudre River Floodplain Regulations
Page 16 of 22
33
Water Board Recommendation
• Importance of life safety and property damage reduction
• Concern -- Preservation of natural and beneficial functions
“The Water Board recommends the existing floodplain
regulations be retained, but that additional consideration
to implementing specific life safety and property damage
criteria and increased preservation of natural and
beneficial functions of the floodplain that would enhance
and support the current regulations be incorporated with
the process to adopt the new Floodplain Rules and
Regulations for the State of Colorado as approved by the
Colorado Water Conservation Board (CWCB).”
Poudre River Floodplain Regulations
AIS Attachment 7
34
NRAB Recommendation
• Option #2 -- Do not allow any new structures in floodplain
• Concern – Preservation of natural and beneficial functions
• Concern – Potential negative long term economic impacts
“The NRAB understands economic growth is important to
the City of Fort Collins but considers the health of the
Poudre river also an important economic factor to the City.
The NRAB previously recommended Option #2 to Council
in December, 2010 that new structures not be allowed in
the Poudre River floodplain. This motion reinforces the
NRAB’s previous recommendation that Option #2 is still
the best option from the Natural Resources perspective in
order to protect the river and help achieve the goals of the
triple bottom line.”.”
Poudre River Floodplain Regulations
AIS Attachment 8
Page 17 of 22
35
Revisions to Floodplain Regulations (CWCB)
• Nov. 2010 -- CWCB approved new Floodplain
Rules and Regulations for Colorado
• Jan. 2014 -- Local governments required to
adopt floodplain regulations that
meet or exceed new requirements
• Majority of current Fort Collins floodplain
regulations meet or exceed new requirements
Poudre River Floodplain Regulations
AIS Attachment 6
36
Revisions to Floodplain Regulations (CWCB)
• There are modifications needed to some
regulations, for example:
• One foot freeboard above 100-Year BFE
(currently 6 inches in some instances)
• Elimination of waiver -- Development in
floodplains where floodplain modifications
not yet mapped
• All costs must be included in determining
substantial improvement requirements
• Enforcement of moderate risk floodplain.
Poudre River Floodplain Regulations
Page 18 of 22
37
Revisions to Floodplain Regulations (CWCB)
• These changes have not been included to date in
the discussion regarding potential revisions to the
Poudre River floodplain regulations for the
following reasons:
• They apply to all floodplains within the City and are
not specific to the Poudre River;
• They are not directly related to the implementation of
an AIR approach to the Poudre River; and
• There has been no public outreach to inform and
obtain feedback on their incorporation.
Poudre River Floodplain Regulations
38
Conclusions
• Comprehensive AIR review process that
includes detailed engineering analyses of
changes in flood elevations and velocities and
their impact on adjacent properties is not
required
• Specific life-safety and property damage criteria
could be combined with current floodplain
regulations to enhance regulations
Poudre River Floodplain Regulations
Page 19 of 22
39
Staff Recommendation
• Additional consideration should be given to
implementing specific life safety and property
damage criteria that will enhance and support the
existing floodplain regulations. These criteria
should be presented in combination with the
State-mandated revisions to citywide floodplain
regulations for Council action in March, 2012.
• Partner with Poudre Fire Authority to develop
criteria with input from public outreach process
Poudre River Floodplain Regulations
Poudre River Floodplain Regulations
COMPARISON
Adverse Impact Review (AIR) Approach
vs.
Modified Approach
(Combination of Current Regulations plus
Life-Safety and Property Damage Considerations)
Criteria AIR Approach Modified Approach
Risk to New Persons
Occupying the Floodplain
X X
Emergency Access
X X
Life-Safety
Criteria
Emergency Warning and
Evacuation Plans
X X
Increase in Flood Elevation X
Increase in Velocity X
Increase in Erosion Potential X
Debris Potential X
Blockages and Damming
(Proposed fences, walls, rows of
trees, etc. Existing unmapped
risk upstream of bridges, railroad
crossings, etc.)
X X
Life-Safety and Flood
Damage Reduction Criteria
Structure Design
X X
Flood Damage
Reduction
Criteria
Flood Damage
Resistant Materials
X X
Analysis of Impact on Other
Properties.
X
Mitigation of Impact on Other
Properties
X
Neighboring
Property Rights
Protection
Public Notification
41
1. Does City Council concur with the Staff
recommendation that additional consideration
be given to implementing specific life safety
and property damage criteria that will enhance
and support the existing floodplain
regulations?
General Direction / Specific Questions
42
2. Upon review of the floodway surcharge
analysis results, does City Council agree with
the elimination of the additional detailed
engineering analyses, notification and
mitigation requirements originally proposed
with the AIR approach?
General Direction / Specific Questions
Page 21 of 22
43
3. Is it acceptable to combine the additional
Poudre River life safety and property damage
criteria along with mandated Colorado Water
Conservation Board (CWCB) revisions to City-
wide floodplain regulations and present both
for formal Council action in March 2012?
General Direction / Specific Questions
44
Poudre River Floodplain Regulations
Potential Revisions
QUESTIONS / FEEDBACK
Page 22 of 22
Page 1 of 2
Page 2 of 2
Page 1 of 2
Page 2 of 2
Utilities Executive Director
City of electric. stormwater. wastewater. water
Fort CoLLins 700 Wood St.
970.224.6003 TDD
utilities @fcgov.com
fcgov.com/utilities
MEMORANDUM
Date: August 26, 2010
To: Mayor Hutchinson and City Council members
Through: Darin Atteberry, City Manager
Brian Janonis, Utilities Executive Director
From: Jon Haukaas, Water Engineering and Field Services Manager
Reference: August 24, 2010 Work Session Summary — Floodplain Regulations
Jon Haukaas, Water Engineering and Field Services Manager and Marsha Hilmes-Robinson,
Floodplain Administrator, presented Council with a brief overview of the work done to date on
the Poudre Floodplain Regulations. Council members present included Mayor Doug
Hutchinson, Mayor Pro Tern Kelly Ohlson, Ben Manvel, David Roy, Wade Troxell, and Aislinn
Kottwitz.
Staff began with the interrelationship between this effort and Plan Fort Collins. It was
recognized that the Poudre River is key to the sustainability of Fort Collins. There was
discussion indicating that Plan Fort Collins is a long range vision while revisions to the Poudre
River Floodplain Regulations are immediate considerations.
The staff presentation reviewed the three options of proposed levels of floodplain regulation.
(1) Return to a 0.1 foot allowable floodway rise limitation, or (2) implement a restriction on new
and expanded structures within the floodplain, or (3) maintain the current regulations.
Next staff explained why this item was being discussed, mainly its relation to the Stormwater
Repurposing efforts and also its relevance to the Plan Fort Collins discussion. Information
regarding the number of parcels, acreage of parcels, and maps showing specific areas of concern
under the various options was discussed. A significant portion of the remaining discussion
included clarification of the concepts associated with floodplains and the effect of fill or other
forms of development.
Key discussion and feedback by Council:
I. Public Outreach Process to explain the range of options considered for proposed changes to
the Floodplain Regulations.
In general, the Council felt that a significant amount of outreach needed to happen and more
should have occurred prior to this discussion . Staff reiterated that the work session serves as
Page 1 of 2
Ft°oLLins
a process check before time and resources are utilized to move forward and that this work
session would serve as the beginning of a substantive outreach process.
Outreach efforts envisioned would include Boards and Commissions, City departments,
stakeholders (i.e. impacted property owners, business associations, interested citizens), and
the general public. Parcel-specific information is currently being developed to identify
impact to individual property owners as the next step.
2. Preference on Options for Regulating the Floodplain
Council did not feel they had sufficient public feedback to have a preferred option at this
time. They were also concerned about these regulations being applied only to the Poudre
River Floodplain. Council discussed the need to look for additional options beyond the three
currently under consideration, including those related to the “No Adverse Impact” approach
that is gaining support nationally.
Council expressed a range of comments and feedback. This included:
• The concern that the recommendations to strengthen the regulations were not justified
and that they would adversely affect the economic health and viability of Fort Collins.
The Downtown River District is a key area of development for the City and
coordinated development approach along the river would be the prudent approach.
• That there needs to be a balance between the economic, social and environmental
considerations for the river.
• Fort Collins needs to stop building where it is likely to flood. ‘Let the river he a
river.” In accordance with the City Plan, we are to protect and restore the natural
functions of the river.
• The “river is a workhorse,” and the community “should use it more as a playground,
not a plaything.”
• That ripwian edge development should be the exception, not the rule, and that 50 to
100 years from now a natural Poudre River would he the greatest community attribute
in Fort Collins.
3. Comments to be added to the Triple Bottom Line (TBL) Analysis Map
Time did not allow an in depth discussion of the TBL chart. One Council member did not
feel this chart format was easy to use and that it needs to be better organized. Staff
concluded with a brief explanation of how comments would be added to the Map.
Three Council members supported continuing the discussion while two felt the need was not
sufficiently expressed to warrant continuing the process.
Specific direction was also provided to Staff to he prepared to address the following questions:
I. What is the purpose and need to change the floodplain regulations?
2. Analyze the impact on properties in more detail.
3. Provide more economic analysis.
4. Describe better “Less people at risk” - how many?
5. Provide more information on “No Adverse Impact” to the public and to the Council.
Page 2 of 2
Page 1 of 3
Page 2 of 3
Page 3 of 3
DATE: October 25, 2011
STAFF: Ken Waido
Pre-taped staff presentation: available
at fcgov.com/clerk/agendas.php
WORK SESSION ITEM
FORT COLLINS CITY COUNCIL
SUBJECT FOR DISCUSSION
The City of Fort Collins’ Current, and Potential Future, Involvement in Supporting the Provision
of Social Services to the Citizens of the Community.
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Many lower income citizens of Fort Collins need help in achieving the most basic human needs of
food and water for survival and clothing and shelter for protection from the elements. But, there are
other human needs beyond those physiological needs for survival, including friendship and family,
health, employment, self-esteem, morality, and respect. When low income citizens lack the
financial resources to meet these needs, public support in providing affordable housing and social
services is especially important for survival and life enhancements. Most of the time, non-profit
agencies and organizations provide the needed housing and social services in the community with
the City of Fort Collins participating in a supporting role.
The City of Fort Collins has a history of allocating financial assistance to a variety of agencies and
organizations that provide the direct, hands-on social (public and human) services to lower income
people of the community. This work session will review what the City is currently doing regarding
supporting the provision of social services in the community. Information will be presented as to
the other entities currently involved in providing, or supporting social services, such as Larimer
County, the United Way of Larimer County, Poudre Valley Health Systems, the Poudre School
District, and Colorado State University. A review of what other communities are doing will lead
the discussion as to whether the City’s current involvement is adequate or not, and if the role is to
change, what additional actions should the City undertake.
GENERAL DIRECTION SOUGHT AND SPECIFIC QUESTIONS TO BE ANSWERED
1. Does Council have any comments or questions about what the City is currently doing in
supporting the provision of social services in the community?
2. Compared to what the City is currently doing under the priorities of the Five-Year Strategic
Plan 2010-2014 (Consolidated Plan), does Council want to consider maintaining, refocusing
and/or expanding the City’s efforts in supporting the provision of social services in the
community?
3. If Council wishes to modify the City’s current efforts, what additional strategies should be
added to the current program?
October 25, 2011 Page 2
BACKGROUND / DISCUSSION
The City of Fort Collins has:
1. An adopted human services policy (adopted in 1992)
2. A strategic plan regarding its role in the provision of social services in the community
(Five-Year Strategic Plan 2010-2014 [Consolidated Plan] adopted in July 2010)
3. A listing in the strategic plan as to the priority social services and affordable housing needs
of the community
4. An established competitive process through which the City makes decisions and allocates
financial assistance to social service agencies (the competitive process was established by
the City Council in January 2000)
5. A Land Use Code that regulates the location of various types of social services depending
upon their expected impacts and compatibility with surrounding uses
6. An involvement through participation in partnerships with other entities and organizations
to strategically address priority social service needs in the community.
These services will be discussed in various sections presented below in this Agenda Item Summary,
and included in additional background material in the Attachments.
Options to Expand the City’s Current Efforts in the Provision of Social Services
The roles municipalities could play in the area of providing social services in their communities fall
into the following four basic categories:
1. Funders
2. Regulators
3. Partnerships/Participants and Conveners/Leaders
4. Providers
The following list includes things the City could do within the above four basic role categories to
expand its current role in supporting the provision of social services in Fort Collins:
1. Create a central focal point for the City’s efforts
2. Review, revise, and re-adopt a City Social Services Policy.
3. Increase funding of social services.
4. Consider Code changes.
5. Consider transportation enhancements.
6. Increase intergovernmental and/or cooperation with other organizations.
The next few sections briefly discuss these options that the City could choose to follow in order to
expand its current efforts in supporting the provision of social services in the community.
Create a Central Focal Point for the City’s Efforts
Within the basic municipal role of Partnerships/Participants and Conveners/Leaders, the City could
create a central focal point for the City’s efforts regarding social services. There is no “one-stop-
shop” for information regarding City involvement in social services. Staff support and involvement
October 25, 2011 Page 3
is scattered throughout the organization, but is primarily centered either in the City Manager’s
Office and/or the Advance Planning Department’s Affordable Housing and Human Services Work
Group.
An expanded City role in social services could mirror the City’s efforts to deal with affordable
housing issues in the community. The table below lists what the City did to enhance its role in
affordable housing and lists parallel items that could be done to enhance the City’s role in social
services.
Affordable Housing Social Services
Created a new affordable housing planner
position within the Advance Planning
Department as the focal point for City’s efforts
regarding affordable housing.
The City could create a new social services
coordinator position as the focal point for City’s
efforts regarding social services. This position
could be a new staff person or assigned to an
existing staff position. If assigned to existing
staff, a rearrangement and prioritization of
current work programs would be necessary.
Created an Affordable Housing Fund to help
supplement federal grant programs that provide
financial assistance to affordable housing
programs and projects.
The City has already created a Human Services
Program Fund to help supplement federal grant
programs that provide financial assistance to
social service agencies and their programs.
Created new mixed-use zoning districts that
opened more areas to multi-family housing
development and offered a density bonus in a
lower density district if the development
contained affordable housing.
The City could evaluate the Land Use Code for
any limitations and barriers for the location of
offices, clinics, and facilities that provide social
services.
Established a set of development incentives to
entice the development of affordable housing in
the community including:
• Reduced the development review
application fee;
• Permitted priority processing of
development applications;
• Allowed affordable housing to be a
justification for the granting of
modifications to development standards
because the granting of the modification
would substantially alleviate an existing,
and described problem of city-wide
concern (the need for affordable housing);
• Reduced landscaping standards;
• Administrative Construction Fee Waiver;
and
• Delayed the collection of Development
Impact Fees until the issuance of
Certificate of Occupancy.
The City could evaluate and create a similar set
of development incentives that are appropriate
for social service providers.
October 25, 2011 Page 4
Review, Revise, and Re-Adopt a City Social Services Policy
Within the basic municipal role of Partnerships/Participants and Conveners/Leaders, the City should
review, revise, and re-adopt a social services policy (initially adopted in 1992). Much has changed
since the policy was initially developed and adopted in 1992. The community has recognized the
critical issue of poverty (e.g., the Pathways Past Poverty effort led by the United Way of Larimer
County) and the need for a focus on special issues (e.g., Homeward 2020 focus on ending chronic
homelessness). The City has a role to play in these efforts and needs a policy consistent within the
current context of the community’s climate towards social services. A revised policy would also
need to be written in the context of sustainability currently being emphasized by the City.
This option could also go beyond just the adoption of a new policy. A refined City social services
strategic plan that takes the required US Department of Housing and Urban Development’s Five-
Year Strategic Plan (Consolidated Plan) to the next level could be a component of this option. This
refined strategic plan would add detailed policies, goals, and an Action Plan for social services in
a way similar to the way the Affordable Housing Strategic Plan added details for affordable housing
beyond what is included in the Consolidated Plan. This effort would involve a more detailed review
and analysis of best practices of what other municipalities are doing in dealing with similar
situations and issues being faced by the Fort Collins community.
It is important to note that a new social services policy, refined strategic plan, and implementation
actions could also lead to dealing with more clearly defined and focused issues of high priority at,
unfortunately, the expense of other issues. For example, increased focus on homelessness could
result in lowering support to job training efforts.
Increase Funding of Social Services
Within the role as a funder, the City could increase the financial resources it allocates to support the
provision of social services.
The City’s Affordable Housing Strategic Plan calls for the establishment of a dedicated, permanent
funding source for the Affordable Housing Fund instead of relying on General Fund Budget
allocations from the City’s bi-annual budgeting process. Options for the source of funding could
include a dedicated sales tax, impact fees, a dedicated property tax, etc. Public support, via a positive
vote in an election, would be required for approval of any tax increase. Additional public support
could be gained if the proposed source also included the sharing of revenue for the provision of
social services. For example, in addition to providing for the Affordable Housing Fund, revenues
would also be distributed into the Human Services Program Fund.
A joint funding source for the Affordable Housing Fund and the Human Services Program Fund
would help strengthen the interrelationships between affordable housing and social services. Many
social service issues can not begin to be solved until clients are placed into stable living situations.
This is known as the “housing first” model. Once a “home” is provided, then the physical or mental
problem can be more successfully treated. Such housing is called “supportive housing” and is,
again, a critical component to dealing with physical or mental problems.
Until the establishment of a permanent funding source, one option could be to refine the priorities
for funding from the existing Human Services Program Fund to only provide support to those
October 25, 2011 Page 5
agencies and organizations currently dealing with the most critical problems. This would result in
fewer, or no, dollars being available for allocation towards other issues.
Consider Code Changes
Within the basic municipal role of Partnerships/Participants and Conveners/Leaders, the Land Use
Code’s regulations and standards could be relaxed to allow social service agencies greater freedom
as to where their offices, clinics, facilities, etc., would be permitted to locate. Development review
processes, i.e., staff, Administrative (Type I), and Planning and Zoning Board (Type II) could also
be examined to see if certain uses really need to be subjected to the “higher” level of review. One
particular review, the change of use, may have requirements that create barriers to renovation and
redevelopment of properties. Building codes could be revised to permit certain variances or
exceptions to reduce or eliminate any burdens with the renovation of buildings for social service
offices, clinics, and facilities.
Consider Transportation Enhancements
Within the role as a social services provider the City could consider transportation enhancements.
Lower income people do not all work “nine-to-five” Monday through Friday jobs. Many work later
into evening hours and during the weekend when the Transfort bus system ceases operations. This
affects not only the journey to work, but compounds other travel needs such as access to child care,
additional education or training, etc. Enhancing transit hours of service operations would be helpful.
Transfort routes could be reviewed to evaluate how transit service assists in providing access to
social service locations.
Increase Intergovernmental and/or Cooperation with Other Organizations
Within the basic municipal role of Partnerships/Participants and Conveners/Leaders, the City could
increase involvement in regional social service efforts. Many of the issues social service agencies
are dealing with are not confined to individual municipal or county political boundaries. These are
regional issues and need to be addressed at a regional level. Some regional type efforts are under
way, such as the United Way of Larimer County’s Pathways Past Poverty. More could be pursued.
The City would need to be strategic with its resources (both financial and staff) in becoming
involved in efforts to deal with specific issues in the future. However, the City should generally
continue to participate and be a partner in many of these future efforts to be established to deal with
specific issues. If necessary, the City could become the leader and convener to organize other
governmental entities, organizations, and agencies to address future problems.
Roles of Municipalities in the Provision of Social Services
As indicated above, the roles municipalities could play in the area of providing social services in
their communities fall into the following four basic categories: Funders; Regulators;
Partnerships/Participants and Conveners/Leaders; and Providers.
October 25, 2011 Page 6
Funders
Many municipalities provide financial assistance to agencies which in turn provide social services
in their communities. The municipalities themselves do not provide any direct services to their
citizens; direct services are provided by the agencies to which the municipalities, and others, provide
the financial assistance. Funding for the financial assistance can come from federal and state
entitlement or other grants. Some municipalities also provide funding from the municipalities’ own
annual general fund operating budget.
Municipalities understand that preventive measures save costs as opposed to dealing with issues
later. Long-term costs can be reduced if communities enhance the effectiveness of social services
and place a greater emphasis on prevention, intervention, and intense rehabilitation. While initial
costs may seem high, the long-term benefits far outweigh the dollars spent.
Regulators
Municipalities have a multitude of regulations that are applied to the providers of social services in
their cities. Sometimes, well meaning codes and regulations designed to protect public, health,
safety, and welfare, have a negative effect on the provision of social services.
Examples of some municipal regulations include:
• Zoning ordinances – these codes dictate the type of use, geographic location, size and
appearance of buildings, e.g., offices, emergency homeless shelters, group homes, etc., and
can include mandatory minimum distance separations between certain types of uses.
• Building codes - regulate physical construction aspects of structures, or regulate
rehabilitation and renovation of existing structures.
• Other ordinances - regulate the size of group living arrangements by distinguishing between
related and non-related individuals using a definition of “family”.
• Various uses - require city registration and/or licensing in order to operate their services.
Partnerships/Participants and Conveners/Leaders
Municipalities will either formally, or informally, partner with other organizations to work
collaboratively to address specific social service needs in the community. Elected officials and/or
city staff members can be assigned, or volunteer, to participate on executive boards, leadership
teams, steering committees, etc. to address specific issues. Sometimes other organizations, usually
non-profits, take the lead with a City’s involvement being a lesser role in the partnership, or as a
participant. Conversely, municipalities can take the lead in addressing social service issues in their
communities. Municipalities can become the major conveners of the partnerships with other
organizations. Effective municipal leadership in social services thus becomes much more vital to
delivering excellent services which make a real difference to the lives of vulnerable people in their
communities.
October 25, 2011 Page 7
Leadership requires an understanding as to what groups exist in the community and the specific
challenges being faced by these groups that impact their ability to obtain a higher quality of life.
Obviously, different groups will have different issues and needs. Municipalities will need to
discover and understand what services are available to the citizens of their community and where
the major gaps are in social service provisions. This would likely require convening agencies,
organizations, and the people in need themselves as to what should be done to address a specific
issue or problem. Leadership requires financial resources to be devoted and staff assigned to do
research, communicate with stakeholders, develop strategic plans and implementation actions, etc.
Municipalities need to examine their own regulations to see whether they pose barriers, or contribute
negatively, to dealing with, or helping solve, identified issues. Municipalities will be required to
lead by example, to use their resources wisely, and learn from others.
Many municipalities develop a Five-Year Strategic Plan, to address the needs and problems of the
community. Some strategic plans are required, such as the Five-Year Strategic Plan (Consolidated
Plan) [see below] required by the US Department of Housing and Urban Development, to maintain
eligibility for receiving federal entitlement grants.
Providers
The municipalities themselves can provide direct services to their citizens. Funding for the provision
of services can come from federal and state entitlement or other grants and/or the municipalities’
own annual general fund operating budget.
City of Fort Collins Human Services Policy
In August 1992, the City developed the following policy related to the provision of human services
within the community:
“The City of Fort Collins desires to continue its development as a city where all of
the people of the community will have an opportunity to live in a safe and healthy
environment. This environment includes the provision of essential and diverse
public services to safeguard the community’s human resources. The City of Fort
Collins considers meeting the basic human needs of families and individual citizens
as part of its purpose and therefore declares, as a matter of policy, that it does have
an appropriate role in the provision of human services to the citizens of Fort Collins.
The City will undertake appropriate and feasible actions to safeguard the
community’s human resources by identifying and supporting those human services
that confer a direct benefit of reasonably general character upon a significant
segment of the City’s population.”
The definition as to what is considered to be human services for the above policy is as follows:
“Providers of human services assist individuals and families in meeting their basic
human needs. Basic human needs include the following: food, clothing, shelter,
transportation, physical and mental health, information/education, crises/social
support, employment/income, dependent care, and recreation.”
October 25, 2011 Page 8
In 1992, the City recognized the following human needs: housing/shelter, food, information, crises
intervention, transportation, financial, education, health, employment, recreation, and dependent
care. Some of the means and programs the City had to deal with these needs included: providing
land/buildings to social service agencies; offered bus passes and Care-A-Van a para-transit system;
had a Police Service’s D.A.R.E. Program; provided an Activities Youth Center and an Adult
Literacy Program; provided CDBG funds; had a Fire Safety Education Program; offered recreation
activities at reduced rates for low-income people; and the Housing Authority provided subsidized
housing units.
Attachment 1 provides additional background material related to the development of the 1992
Human Services Policy.
City of Fort Collins as a Social Services Funder
Five-Year Strategic Plan 2010-2014 (Consolidated Plan)
The City of Fort Collins, like all municipalities that receive entitlement grants from the US
Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD), is required to develop and adopt a five-
year strategic plan. The City’s Five-Year Strategic Plan 2010-2014, better known as the
Consolidated Plan, outlines how expected financial assistance from HUD in the Community
Development Block Grant (CDBG) and Home Investment Partnerships (HOME) Programs will be
utilized to address the most pressing affordable housing, public service (human and social services),
and public facility needs in the community.
Goals in the Consolidated Plan include projects and programs that serve homeless, near-homeless
and low-income populations; address fair housing, and lead-based paint issues; overcome
institutional barriers to the production and/or preservation of affordable housing; and encourage
economic development and neighborhood revitalization.
On July 20, 2010, the City Council conducted a public hearing and adopted the City’s Five-Year
Strategic Plan 2010-2014 which contained the Priority Needs to be addressed for the five-year
period between 2010 and 2014. In terms of the priority public service needs, the Consolidated Plan
states:
“Priority Public Services Needs: In order to provide a suitable living environment,
the City of Fort Collins will:
1. Support and enhance Public Services that focus on providing basic services
to low-income individuals and families over the next five years using 15%
of CDBG funding and 100% of City Human Services Program funds.”
Attachment 2 provides additional detailed information on the Priority Needs as presented in the
City’s Consolidated Plan including priority needs for Housing, Homeless, Public Facilities, Non-
Homeless Special Needs, Special Needs (e.g., elderly, youth, etc.), and Community Development
Needs.
The Consolidated Plan, in addition to identifying the greatest public/human service, public facility,
and community development needs, establishes the funding priorities for a maximum of 15% of the
October 25, 2011 Page 9
available CDBG funds for public services. Attachment 3 presents Table 2B of the Consolidated
Plan which identifies the “Priority Community Development Needs” of the City by ranking them
as a High, Moderate, or Low Priority. The list of High Priority items include: acquisition of real
property, homeless facilities, child care facilities, health facilities, operating costs of homeless/AIDS
programs, handicapped services, transportation services, substance abuse services, battered and
abused spouces, employment training, child care services, rental housing subsidies, security
deposits, rehabilitation (both single-family and multi-familyunits),energy efficiency improvements,
acquisition for rehabilitation, and residential historic preservation.
If Council desires to change the City’s current efforts, new priorities could be added, or a more
focused list reducing the High Priority items could be made.
Human Services Program Fund
In 2006, the City initiated its own Human Service Program Fund which currently provides General
Fund dollars to support human service agencies to provide direct services to the citizens of Fort
Collins. Thus, the City helps fund human service agencies but provides no direct services itself. The
funds from the Human Services Program are combined with a limited portion of Community
Development Block Grant (CDBG) funds from the US Department of Housing and Urban
Development (a maximum of 15% of CDBG funds can be used for “public” services by HUD
regulations) to create a pool of funds that are allocated to social service agencies through the spring
cycle of the competitive process. From 2001 to 2005, the City contributed General Fund dollars to
the Larimer County Health and Human Services Department for the Human Resources Grant
Program. The Human Resources Grant Program funds were allocated by the County and the City
distributed its own small portion of CDBG funds.
The amount of funding placed into the Human Services Program by the City Council is currently
determined through the City’s biennial Budgeting For Outcomes (BFO) budgeting process. The
annual funding amount has ranged from $332,000 (in 2006) to $540,334 (in 2011), which included
$150,733 of Keep Fort Collins Great (KFCG) funds.
The City’s Human Services Program is utilized to fund a variety of services, including but not
limited to, emergency shelter for the homeless, day care, job training, housing counseling, meals for
children and the elderly.
Attachment 4 provides a summary of General Fund allocations to the human services. A history of
the recipients of City financial assistance to social service agencies in presented in Attachment 5.
Stakeholder Coordination
City staff requested comments from non-profit agencies and other organizations in the community
regarding the City’s role in supporting the provision of social services in the community. Responses
back from these stakeholders indicated additional funding would be helpful. For example, the City
received a total of $950,000 of funding requests during the spring 2011 cycle of the competitive
process. The Human Services Program and limited CDBG funding would need to have almost $1
million available to allocate to fully cover the amount of recent requests.
October 25, 2011 Page 10
City of Fort Collins as a Social Services Regulator
The City’s Land Use Code defines various types of uses and regulates the location of these uses that
provide social services in the community. Many of the zoning districts in the city are mixed-use
districts which allow both residential and non-residential uses. However, the location of the
following social services are regulated by the Land Use Code:
1. Offices and clinics
2. Group homes
3. Shelters for victims of domestic violence
4. Long-term care facilities, including:
a. Convalescent centers
b. Nursing care facilities
c. Intermediate health care facilities; and
d. Independent living facilities.
5. Child care centers
6. Day shelters
The City does not regulate family care homes, provided they have obtained a license to operate from
the State of Colorado.
Attachment 6 contains more discussion on the Social Service Uses Regulated by the City’s Land
Use Code.
City of Fort Collins Partnerships/Participants and Conveners/Leaders in Social Services
Provision
The City is engaged in several partnerships with other entities that are attempting to address some
significant social issues in the community. Two examples discussed below are the Homeward 2020
and the Pathways Past Poverty efforts.
Homeward 2020 originally came out of UniverCity Connections with its focus on convening the
local community and catalyzing opportunities for positive change with a focus on three of Fort
Collins’ community assets: Colorado State University; the Downtown; and the Poudre River.
Homeward 2020 is a very specific initiative to end chronic homelessness in Fort Collins by the year
2020. The Homeward 2020 initiative became a reality, when the City of Fort Collins offered the
initial funding, with the Community Foundation of Northern Colorado serving as the formal
manager, fiscal agent, and legal supervisor for the Ten Year Plan.
In 2007, Census Bureau statistics showed a growing percentage of people living in poverty in
Larimer County. The United Way of Larimer County, the lead non-profit organization focused on
health and human service issues in the community, started a conversation about what could be done
to turn this trend around before poverty became too large of an issue to effectively address. In
collaboration with Colorado State University, Northern Colorado Economic Development
Corporation, Fort Collins Coloradoan, and other non-profit organizations, the Pathways Past
Poverty Initiative was created. Pathways Past Poverty is about providing a basic support system for
individuals and families to succeed. A basic support system in place for individuals and families
creates a more stable workforce in the community.
October 25, 2011 Page 11
According to data from the US Census Bureau’s 2005-2009 American Communities Survey (ACS)
5-Year Estimates, 19.6% of the people in Fort Collins are Below the Poverty Level. Since the
19.6% figure includes college students living in the city perhaps more telling figures are statistics
on the number of Families Below the Poverty Level. A Family is a household where there is a
relationship between the Head of the household and the other members of the household. According
to ACS data, 7.6% of all Families in Fort Collins live Below Poverty Level; 5.4% of Married-
Couple Families with dependent children under 18 years of age live Below Poverty Level; and
25.8% of Families with a Female Head of household (i.e., no husband present) live Below the
Poverty Level. The following table summarizes these statistics.
Categories Percent in Fort Collins
People Below the Poverty Level 19.6%
Families Below Poverty Level 7.6%
Married-Couples w/Children <18 years Below Poverty 5.4%
Families with Female Head on Household Below Poverty 25.8%
Additional background information about Homeward 2020 and Pathways Past Poverty is presented
in Attachment 7.
City of Fort Collins as a Provider of Social Services
The City helps fund non-profit agencies in their provision of a variety of social services but is not
a direct major provider of traditional social services itself. Perhaps the City’s most critical
contribution in the arena of providing social services is in transportation with the Transfort bus
system.
The Culture, Parks, Recreation, and Environmental (CPRE) Services Unit, for example, does not
provide traditional social services, however, it does occasionally provide venues for the provision
of some social services. For example, the Northside Aztlan Community Center will serve as a
location for meals to low income seniors and children, but the food is provided by the Food Bank,
or other non-profit agencies. CPRE also provides reduced, or waived, fee recreation classes or
access to facilities for low income people which helps people use services that are more recreational
in nature. Thus, many of the services provided by CPRE help people stay physically and
emotionally healthy and improve their quality of life, but are not traditional social services.
There are some City employee leave benefits available through the Human Resources Department,
such as the back-up child and adult care, and a referral services for counseling services through the
Employee Assistance Program. And several departments, including Police Services, work closely
with agencies and organizations that provide or support social services in Fort Collins.
Stakeholder Coordination
City staff requested comments from non-profit agencies and other organizations in the community
regarding the City’s role in the provision of social services. Responses back from these stakeholders
commented that the City should not become a provider of social services.
October 25, 2011 Page 12
Other Governmental Entities and Non-Profit Organizations Providing Social Services to
Citizens of Fort Collins
There are other governmental entities and non-profit organizations that either provide, or support
the provision of, social services to the citizens of Fort Collins. These include:
1. Larimer County
2. United Way of Larimer County
3. Poudre Valley Health Systems
4. Poudre School District
5. Colorado State University
More detailed information about these entities and organizations are presented in Attachment 8.
Presented below is a brief summary of their activities.
Larimer County
State law (CRS 26-1-115) requires Larimer County, and all counties in Colorado, to establish a
department of social services. There is no similar state law requiring municipalities to have a
department of social services and/or to provide any social services. The Larimer County Department
of Health and Human Services operates programs for low income, elderly, disabled and minority
residents, providing financial assistance for shelter, food and medical care. Individual and family
programs protect adults and children, help people to become employed and assist youth and families
in properly handling their family and community conflicts.
United Way of Larimer County
The United Way of Larimer County solicits monetary contributions from individuals, groups,
organizations, and businesses and allocates financial assistance to various non-profit agencies to
provide social services in Fort Collins. Many of the agencies that receive United Way funding also
receive financial assistance from the City’s Human Services Program and CDBG funds allocated
through the competitive process. While fund raising is an important aspect of the United Way of
Larimer County, the organization does much more than fundraising alone. They are a leader in
creating long-lasting changes by addressing underlying causes of the most pressing needs people
face in the community.
The United Way’s Pathways Past Poverty effort was briefly discussed above, with additional
information presented in Attachment 7. In addition to Pathways Past Poverty, the United Way of
Larimer County is a major referral service for social services in the community. United Way's 2-1-1
information and referral specialists are skilled professionals who assess callers' needs, determine
their options and best course of action by directing them to appropriate programs and services.
Poudre Valley Health Systems
Poudre Valley Health System (PVHS) is a regional medical hub whose outpatient services include
counseling services where licensed clinical social workers provide counseling to patients and
families.
October 25, 2011 Page 13
Poudre School District
In addition to providing education to children from Kindergarten through Grade 12, the Poudre
School District in the arena of social services also has Early Childhood Programs and a Department
of Child Nutrition that serves meals to students.
Note: A separate October 25, 2011, work session agenda item will address the issue of early
childhood education in greater detail.
Colorado State University
Colorado State University’s Early Childhood Center is the lab school for the Department of Human
Development and Family Studies Program. The Center offers a quality program for young children,
trains CSU students for careers in early childhood education, and child life specialists, and provides
opportunities for research related to children, families, and early childhood education.
Programs of Other Municipalities
Loveland
The City of Loveland’s approach to helping social service agencies is exactly the approach used by
the City of Fort Collins. Loveland uses Community Development Block Grant funds provided by
HUD to assist organizations in providing affordable housing and supportive services to persons with
low to moderate incomes. Loveland also has a Human Service Grant Program funded through the
City’s General Fund. The Fund provides grants to non-profit agencies for human services including
youth services, health care, childcare, domestic violence services, and employment assistance.
Greeley
The City of Greeley’s Urban Renewal Authority is the lead agency for the administration of the
City’s federal grant programs (CDBG and HOME). Greeley’s CDBG Program has focused on
“sticks and bricks” for affordable housing with very little provided for public services. What public
service money is provided goes to assist homeless and at-risk families to help them move from
homelessness to housing self-sufficiency.
Boulder
The City of Boulder approaches social issues from a broad community perspective, working with
non-profit organizations, school districts, higher education, and other local governments, to plan for
the future needs of Boulder residents and provide support for the community to meet current human
service needs. The City of Boulder has a Human Services Fund that annually distributes
approximately $2.5 million to community agencies in support of the Housing and Human Services
Master Plan. Awards are made once every two years on a competitive basis.
Longmont
The City of Longmont annually contracts with local non-profit agencies to provide services that
address designated human service needs in the Longmont community. Longmont uses only a limited
October 25, 2011 Page 14
amount of its CDBG funding for social services. Most funding for social services comes from
Longmont’s General Fund.
Colorado Springs
The City of Colorado Springs provides funding to local non-profit agencies for the provision of
human services to low and moderate-income persons in the community. City discretionary human
services dollars and CDBG funds help support programs that range from child care, to self-
sufficiency, to emergency care and shelter.
Attachment 9 provides more information about the programs of these municipalities.
ATTACHMENTS
1. 1992 Human Services Policy Background Material
2. Priority Needs from the Five-Year Strategic Plan 2010-2014 (Consolidated Plan).
3. Table 2B from the 2010-2014 Consolidated Plan – CDBG Chart of Eligible Activities to
Benefit Low-Income Areas and Low-Income Individuals and Families
4. Summary of Funding Allocations to Human Services
5. History of Recipients of City Financial Assistance to Social Service Agencies
6. Social Service Uses Regulated by the City’s Land Use Code
7. Homeward 2020 and Pathways Past Poverty
8. Other Governmental Entities and Non-Profit Organizations Providing Social Services to
Citizens of Fort Collins
9. Programs of Other Municipalities
10. PowerPoint Presentation
1
ATTACHMENT 1
1992 Human Services Policy Background Material
Purpose
Goal:
Strengthen community commitment to human services.
Objective:
Develop comprehensive policy statement that defines the City’s role and responsibilities
with respect to human and social services in the community.
Process
Assess City’s current human services involvement.
Define City’s current “de facto” human services policy.
Solicit ideas and comments from City boards and commissions, local agencies,
service clubs, organizations and major employers through presentations and
discussions.
Report community comments and policy options back to City Council.
Adopt policy.
City role and responsibility by charter:
“provide essential public services”
City mission statement:
“provide personalized quality community services”
Public service includes human services with resources allocated by City Council.
De Facto Policy
The City assists individuals and families (customers) in meeting their human needs. The
following customer categories are identified:
Age
Economic hardship[ Disability
Minority status
Jeopardy/risk factor
The City recognizes the following human needs:
2
Housing/shelter
Food
Information
Crises intervention
Transportation
Financial
Education’
Health
Employment
Recreation
Dependent care
The City allocates the following resources to meet the needs of the Human Service
customer.
Direct provision of City services/assets (general tax dollars)
Contracting for services
Redistributing federal tax dollars and grants
Regulatory mechanisms
Report Summary
Total City of Fort Collins Contribution for one year: $1,452,910
Administrative Services: $385,551
Land/Buildings
Tax Work-off
Mentor/Public Service Programs
Rebates
Bus Passes
Care-A-Van
Police Services: $82,101
D.A.R.E.
Santa Cops
Laramie River Valley Rendezvous
Northside Heat Basketball Camp
Cultural, Library & Recreational Services: $272,853
Activities Youth Center
Adult Literacy
3
Fee Reductions
Financial Assistance
Community Planning & Environmental Services: $445,740
CDBG Funds
Economic Opportunity Fund
Fee Exemption/Housing Authority
Access Ramps Program
Poudre Fire Authority: $66,294
Smoke Detector Program
Youth Fire Awareness Program/Counseling
Fire Safety Education
Boards and Commissions: Citizen and Staff Time
Disability
Status of Women
CDBG
Parks & recreation
Housing Authority
Human Relations
Senior Advisory
Human Resource Grant Program: $196,000
Human Services Allocation Techniques
Techniques Definition Examples
Direct
$949,691
Contacts with agencies,
allocation of General Fund
taxes, provision of City
assets.
Human Resource
Grant Program
Land/Buildings
Tax Work-off
Rebates
Bus Passes
D.A.R.E.
Santa Cops
Laramie River
Rendezvous
Northside Heat
Basketball
Activities Youth
Center
4
Recreation Fee
Reductions
Economic
Opportunities Fund
Fee
Exemption/Housing
Access Ramp
Program
REACH Program
Redistribute
$436,925
Allocation of Federal tax
dollars and grants
Care-A-Van
Adult Literacy
CDBG Funds
Regulatory Requirements by ordinance
or administratively
LDGS
Building Codes &
Standards
Anti-discrimination
Ordinance
Civil Rights Acts
American
Disabilities Act
Other Local Human Services
Agencies Involvement
Larimer County Health & Human Services $30 M
Fort Collins United Way $1.6 M
Poudre R-1 School District ??
Poudre Valley Hospital $4.6 M
Comparison Between Cities
1991 Funding to Human Services Programs
City 1-Year Funding 1991 Population Cost per Citizen
Fort Collins $1.45 M 89,000 $16.32
Boulder 2.6 M 84,000 30.34
Greeley .04 M 61,000 .60
Lakewood .5 M 126,000 4.26
Tempe, AZ .85 M 145,000 5.86
Eugene, OR .75 M 105,000 7.18
Cheyenne, WY .39 M 70,000 5.57
1
ATTACHMENT 2
City of Fort Collins
Five-Year Strategic Plan 2010-2014 (Consolidated Plan)
Development of the City’s Consolidated Plan included consultations with more than 60
local non-profit agencies, entities, and organizations who are actively involved in serving
low- and moderate-income persons and families in Fort Collins. The City’s Commission
on Disabilities, Senior Advisory Board, Women’s Commission, and the Human Relations
Commission, along with the Affordable Housing Board and the CDBG Commission,
were also consulted. Residents of Fort Collins were surveyed through a questionnaire
presented at several focus group meetings. An on-line survey was also available. Over
170 persons responded to these surveys, providing information that included: type of
housing and household size; age and current services received; services needed; and
barriers to receiving needed services. The City’s Affordable Housing Strategic Plan
2010-2014 provided input to address affordable housing needs, as did the Larimer
County Housing Needs Assessment, completed in 2009.
On July 20, 2010, the City Council conducted a public hearing and adopted the City’s
Five-Year Strategic Plan 2010-2014 which contained the following Priority Needs to be
addressed for the five-year period between 2010 and 2014:
Priority Housing Needs: In order to provide decent housing to Fort Collins
residents, the City of Fort Collins will improve the availability, affordability, and
sustainability of housing through the following:
1. Increase the inventory of affordable rental units through the production of new
rental units, or the acquisition and rehabilitation of former market rate units,
converting them to affordable housing.
2. Preserve affordable housing units by monitoring the status of existing affordable
units to maintain or add to the inventory.
3. Increase housing and facilities for people with special needs.
4. Provide financial assistance for first-time homebuyers.
Priority Homeless Needs: In order to provide decent housing and a suitable living
environment, the City of Fort Collins will:
1. Provide support and assistance to agencies and organizations that provide
permanent supportive housing.
Priority Public Services Needs: In order to provide a suitable living environment,
the City of Fort Collins will:
1. Support and enhance Public Services that focus on providing basic services to
low-income individuals and families over the next five years using 15% of CDBG
funding and 100% of City Human Services Program funds.
2
Priority Public Facilities Needs: In order to provide a suitable living environment,
the City of Fort Collins will improve the sustainability and availability/accessibility
of public facilities through the following:
1. Acquire, support and enhance Public Facilities which focus on providing basic
services to low-income citizens and families.
Priority Non-Homeless Special Needs: In order to provide a suitable living
environment and decent housing, the City of Fort Collins will:
1. Provide funding to projects that address housing and supportive service needs for
the elderly, persons with disabilities, at-risk/endangered teens and young adults,
victims of domestic violence, and persons with mental illness and/or substance
abuse issues.
Priority Special Needs: In order to provide a suitable living environment and decent
housing, the City of Fort Collins will:
1. Support and encourage housing and public service projects that directly address
the needs of special needs populations, including: the elderly/frail elderly, persons
with disabilities, at-risk/endangered teens and young adults, victims of domestic
violence, persons with mental illness and/or substance abuse issues, and persons
with HIV/AIDS and their families.
Priority Community Development Needs: In order to provide for economic
opportunity, the City of Fort Collins will improve the availability and sustainability of
economic development by the following:
1. Support, promote or expand development of the Fort Collins Urban Renewal
Authority (URA).
2. Remove severely blighted properties, especially to promote infill redevelopment.
3. Continue to expand use of tools for developments such as the Section 108 Loan
Program, Brownfields, and Economic Development Initiatives.
4. Use CDBG funds to leverage public and private funds.
5. Support, establish or expand programs that provide job training or career
development of low- and moderate-income persons.
6. Implement revitalization efforts in neighborhoods to improve housing and/or
economic development.
7. Promote or support sustainable energy resources.
1
ATTACHMENT 3
Table 2B
CDBG CHART OF ELIGIBLE ACTIVITIES TO BENEFIT LOW-INCOME
AREAS OR LOW-INCOME INDIVIDUALS AND FAMILIES
Priority List
H: High, M: Moderate, L: Low
Eligible Activity 2010-2014
Acquisition of Real Property H
Disposition L
Public Facilities and Improvements (General) M
Senior Centers L
Handicapped Centers M
Homeless Facilities H
Youth Centers L
Neighborhood Centers L
Parks, Recreational Facilities L
Parking Facilities L
Solid Waste Disposal Improvements L
Flood Drain Improvements L
Water/Sewer Improvements L
Street Improvements L
Sidewalks L
Child Care Centers H
Tree Planting L
Fire Stations/Equipment L
Health Facilities H
Abused and Neglected Children Facilities M
Asbestos Removal M
Facilities for AIDS Patients L
Operating Costs of Homeless/AIDS Programs H
Clearance and Demolition L
Clean-up of Contaminated Sites L
Public Services (General) H
Senior Services M
Handicapped Services H
Legal Services L
Youth Services M
Transportation Services H
Substance Abuse Services H
Battered and Abused Spouses H
Employment Training H
Crime Awareness L
Fair Housing Activities L
2
Eligible Activity 2010-2014
Tenant/Landlord Counseling M
Child Care Services H
Health Services H
Abused and Neglected Children H
Mental Health Services H
Screening for Lead Paint Hazards L
Subsistence Payments L
Homeownership Assistance (not direct) L
Rental Housing Subsidies H
Security Deposits H
Interim Assistance L
Urban Renewal Completion L
Relocation L
Loss of Rental Income L
Removal of Architectural Barriers L
Privately Owned Utilities L
Construction of Housing L
Direct Home Ownership Assistance M
Rehabilitation, Single-Unit Residential H
Rehabilitation, Multi-Unit Residential H
Public Housing Modernization H
Rehab, Publicly-owned Residential L
Rehab, Commercial L
Energy Efficiency Improvements H
Acquisition for Rehabilitation H
Rehabilitation Administration M
Lead-Based Pain Testing and Abatement L
Code Enforcement L
Residential Historic Preservation H
Non-Residential Historic Preservation M
Commercial/Industrial Acquisition L
Commercial/Industrial Infrastructure Development L
Commercial/Industrial Building Acquisition, etc. L
Other Commercial/Industrial Improvements L
Financial Assistance to For-Profits L
Economic Development Technical Assistance L
Micro-Enterprise Assistance L
1
ATTACHMENT 4
Summary of Funding Allocations to Human Services
The table below provides a history of General Fund contributions to the County (2001-
2005) and Human Services Program (since 2006).
YEAR FUNDING AMOUNT
2001 $369,781
2002 $384,572
2003 $399,955
2004 $370,457
2005 $370,457
2006 $332,000
2007 $335,000
2008 $440,334
2009 $440,334
2010 $389,601
2011 $540,334*
*Includes $150,733 of Keep Fort Collins Great (KFCG) funds.
The City’s Human Services Program is utilized to fund a variety of services, including
but not limited to, emergency shelter for the homeless, day care, job training, housing
counseling, meals for children and the elderly, etc. Agencies and organizations receiving
funding include, B.A.S.E. Camp, Boys & Girls Club, Teaching Tree Early Childhood
Development Center, Catholic Charities, Crossroads Safehouse, Disabled Resource
Services, Education and Life Training Center, Food Bank, Neighbor-to-Neighbor,
Northern Colorado AIDS Project, Respite Care, Project Self-Sufficiency, Volunteers of
America, and the Women’s Resource Center.
Many of the social services supported by the City are closely linked to affordable
housing, with some actually being part of the affordable housing continuum, e.g.,
Catholic Charities’ “The Mission” homeless shelter and the Crossroads Safehouse for the
victims of domestic violence. Others either help low-income people better themselves
through education and job training, stay gainfully employed by providing day care for
their children in a secure and safe environment, or find and keep decent safe affordable
housing through housing counseling.
History of Recipients of City Financial Assistance to Social Service Agencies
Agency 2011 CDBG HSP 2010 CDBG HSP
B.A.S.E. Camp-Sliding Scale $57,000 $57,000 $54,200 $54,200
Boys & Girls Club $18,644 $18,644 $17,458 $17,458
CARE-Supportive Services $0
CASA-Harmony House $9,360 $9,360
CCN Seniors $11,331 $11,331 $7,000 $7,000
CCN Shelter $40,000 $40,000 $29,500 $29,500
Center for Family Outreach $0
ChildSafe $0
Consumer Credit Counseling
Crossroads Safehouse-Adv. $42,202 $42,202 $51,042 $51,042
DRS-ATI $28,442 $28,442 $22,010 $22,010
Elderhaus-Therapy Center $23,592 $23,592 $20,142 $20,142
Elderhaus-Vets Prog
ELTC-Emp Skills Training $19,483 $19,483 $17,500 $17,500
ELTC-Evening Class Childcare
ELTC-Job Access & Retention
Family Center-Sliding Scale $30,000 $30,000 $20,500 $20,500
Food Bank-Kids Café $21,000 $21,000 $21,667 $21,667
FCHC-Case Management
HOPE Center-Sliding Scale
HPI-Emerg. Rent Assistance $45,000 $45,000 $40,000 $28,516 $11,484
LCMH-Case Manager
LCMH-CDDT $14,000 $14,000
LCMH-Crisis Prevention
LCMH-Jail Diversion
LCMH-Murphy Center $0
Matthews House $27,639 $27,639 $0
N2N - Hsg Counseling $40,175 $40,175 $39,415 $39,415
N2N - Rent $25,000 $25,000 $20,200 $20,200
North. Colo AIDS Project $24,500 $24,500 $24,500 $24,500
PSD-305 Club Sustainability
PSD/CSU/PVHS-Core Center
Project Self-Sufficiency $22,000 $22,000 $28,500 $28,500
Respite Care-Sliding Scale $30,000 $30,000 $22,500 $22,500
RVNA-Home Hlth Care $35,000 $9,049 $25,951 $26,100 $26,100
SCELC-Sliding Scale
SCELC-Pre-School
Suicide Resource Center $3,000 $3,000
Turning Point-Em Ment Hlth Svcs $0
Turning Point-STEP
Turning Point-Volunteer Coord
UDCC/Teaching Tree $60,000 $60,000 $51,500 $51,500
United Way 2-1-1
VOA-Home Delivered Meals $29,200 $29,200 $19,500 $19,500
WRC-Dental Care Assistance $32,890 $32,890 $34,725 $34,725
Total $689,458 $149,124 $540,334 $567,959 $178,358 $389,601
Note 1 - A zero in the year column indicates applicant applied but did not receive funding
Note 2 - A grey area in the year column indicates the applicant did not apply that year
1
ATTACHMENT 5
Agency 2009 CDBG HSP 2008 CDBG HSP
B.A.S.E. Camp-Sliding Scale $60,831 $60,831 $48,000 $48,000
Boys & Girls Club $18,309 $18,309 $11,520 $11,520
CARE-Supportive Services
CASA-Harmony House
CCN Seniors $10,000 $1,000 $10,000 $10,000
CCN Shelter $37,856 $37,856 $43,546 $43,564
Center for Family Outreach $0
ChildSafe
Consumer Credit Counseling $0
Crossroads Safehouse-Adv. $51,542 $51,542 $45,000 $45,000
DRS-ATI $25,656 $25,656 $22,054 $22,054
Elderhaus-Therapy Center $23,592 $23,592 $21,202 $21,202
Elderhaus-Vets Prog $0
ELTC-Emp Skills Training $18,000 $18,000 $17,623 $17,623
ELTC-Evening Class Childcare $0
ELTC-Job Access & Retention $0
Family Center-Sliding Scale $20,000 $20,000 $20,000 $20,000
Food Bank-Kids Café $27,959 $27,959 $22,167 $22,167
FCHC-Case Management
HOPE Center-Sliding Scale
HPI-Emerg. Rent Assistance $40,671 $40,671 $40,000 $40,000
LCMH-Case Manager
LCMH-CDDT
LCMH-Crisis Prevention $0
LCMH-Jail Diversion
LCMH-Murphy Center
Matthews House $0 $14,000 $14,000
N2N - Hsg Counseling $39,915 $39,915 $39,375 $39,375
N2N - Rent $23,000 $23,000 $21,000 $21,000
North. Colo AIDS Project $29,500 $29,500 $25,000 $25,000
PSD-305 Club Sustainability $0
PSD/CSU/PVHS-Core Center
Project Self-Sufficiency $33,000 $18,837 $14,163 $30,000 $30,000 $30,000
Respite Care-Sliding Scale $25,000 $25,000 $38,000 $25,000 $19,400 $5,860
RVNA-Home Hlth Care $38,000 $35,000 $35,000
SCELC-Sliding Scale
SCELC-Pre-School
Suicide Resource Center
Turning Point-Em Ment Hlth Svcs
Turning Point-STEP
Turning Point-Volunteer Coord $0
UDCC/Teaching Tree $54,367 $54,367 $54,000 $54,000
United Way 2-1-1 $0
VOA-Home Delivered Meals $29,108 $29,108 $25,116 $25,116
WRC-Dental Care Assistance $35,223 $35,223 $29,040 $29,040
Total $641,529 $201,195 $431,334 $598,643 $158,587 $470,334
Note 1 - A zero in the year column indicates applicant applied but did not receive funding
Note 2 - A grey area in the year column indicates the applicant did not apply that year
2
Agency 2007 CDBG HSP 2006 CDBG HSP
B.A.S.E. Camp-Sliding Scale $35,506 $35,506 $33,815 $33,815
Boys & Girls Club
CARE-Supportive Services
CASA-Harmony House $0 $0
CCN Seniors $0 $0
CCN Shelter $31,357 $31,357 $42,158 $42,158
Center for Family Outreach
ChildSafe
Consumer Credit Counseling
Crossroads Safehouse-Adv. $40,900 $40,900 $36,400 $36,400
DRS-ATI $20,718 $21,718 $20,002 $20,002
Elderhaus-Therapy Center $20,400 $20,400 $16,920 $16,920
Elderhaus-Vets Prog
ELTC-Emp Skills Training $20,000 $20,000 $20,000 $20,000
ELTC-Evening Class Childcare
ELTC-Job Access & Retention
Family Center-Sliding Scale
Food Bank-Kids Café $14,719 $14,719 $15,472 $15,472
FCHC-Case Management $0
HOPE Center-Sliding Scale $0
HPI-Emerg. Rent Assistance $35,000 $35,000 $35,000 $35,000
LCMH-Case Manager $0
LCMH-CDDT
LCMH-Crisis Prevention
LCMH-Jail Diversion $0
LCMH-Murphy Center
Matthews House
N2N - Hsg Counseling $55,290 $55,290 $58,599 $58,599
N2N - Rent $15,000 $15,000 $15,000 $15,000
North. Colo AIDS Project $19,000 $9,160 $9,840 $19,000 $2,591 $16,409
PSD-305 Club Sustainability
PSD/CSU/PVHS-Core Center $0
Project Self-Sufficiency $22,000 $22,000 $18,000 $18,000
Respite Care-Sliding Scale $20,000 $20,000 $20,000 $20,000
RVNA-Home Hlth Care $25,000 $25,000 $25,000 $25,000
SCELC-Sliding Scale $20,000 $20,000 $18,000 $18,000
SCELC-Pre-School $10,400 $10,400
Suicide Resource Center
Turning Point-Em Ment Hlth Svcs
Turning Point-STEP $0
Turning Point-Volunteer Coord
UDCC/Teaching Tree $54,000 $54,000 $60,500 $60,500
United Way 2-1-1 $0
VOA-Home Delivered Meals $19,622 $19,622 $14,600 $14,600
WRC-Dental Care Assistance $24,511 $24,511 $18,098 $18,098
Total $493,023 $158,023 $336,000 $496,964 $164,964 $332,000
Note 1 - A zero in the year column indicates applicant applied but did not receive funding
Note 2 - A grey area in the year column indicates the applicant did not apply that year
3
1
ATTACHMENT 6
Social Service Uses Regulated by the City’s Land Use Code
In the discussion below, zoning districts will be described as either residential or non-
residential zones with no discussion of the many exceptions that may apply. The
following uses which provide social services are regulated by the City’s Land Use Code:
Offices and clinics are permitted in every non-residential zoning district.
Group homes are permitted in almost every zoning district. There are different maximum
number of residents and minimum separation requirements between a site location and
any other group homes for the various districts. There are two definitions regarding the
types of Group homes, a Residential group home (maximum of 8 residents) is a
residency operated as a single dwelling, and a Large group care facility (maximum of 20
residents) is a residential facility that offers facilities and services. Both definitions
contain the same following wording:
…licensed or operated by a governmental agency to provide special care or
rehabilitation due to homelessness, physical condition or illness, mental condition
or illness, elderly age or social, behavioral or disciplinary problems, provided the
authorized supervisory personnel are present on the premises.
Thus, the City’s Land Use Code basically, other than size of a facility, does not
differentiate as to the types of physical or mental issues for which residents need care or
rehabilitation in a group home setting.
Shelters for victims of domestic violence are permitted in almost every zoning district and
must follow Group home resident maximum and minimum separation requirements.
There are four different types of a Long-term care facility: 1) a Convalescent center; 2)
Nursing care facility; 3) Intermediate health care facility; and 4) Independent living
facility. Such uses are only permitted in the Mixed Use Neighborhood Districts
established by City Plan in 1997, the Downtown, Community Commercial Centers, and
Employment Districts, including Harmony Corridor.
Child care centers are permitted in almost every zoning district and are facilities for the
care of 7 or more children under the age of 16. Child care centers also include facilities
for children under the age of 6 that have stated educational purposes and are operated in
conjunction with a college or other types of schools.
The City does not regulate private Day care homes provided they have obtained a license
to operate from the State of Colorado.
A Day shelter is a facility that provides temporary daytime shelter for the homeless. Day
shelters are limited in location to non-residential districts.
1
ATTACHMENT 7
Homeward 2020 and Pathways Past Poverty
Homeward 2020 originally came out of UniverCity Connections with its focus on
convening the local community and catalyzing opportunities for positive change with a
focus on three of Fort Collins’ community assets: Colorado State University; the
Downtown; and the Poudre River. Within this effort, it was recognized that the high
concentration of homeless people in downtown Fort Collins was also a considerable
concern that needed to be addressed.
Homeward 2020 is a very specific initiative to end homelessness in Fort Collins by the
year 2020. This is a collaborative effort made up of support and leadership from the
business, government, and non-profit sectors in the community with a very evidence-
based, metric-driven approach. The Homeward 2020 initiative became a reality, when the
City of Fort Collins offered the initial funding, with the Community Foundation of
Northern Colorado serving as the formal manager, fiscal agent, and legal supervisor for
the Ten Year Plan. Since then, additional funders have stepped forward to leverage
support for the Ten Year Plan. City staff members serve on the Homeward 2020
Executive Board and Leadership Team.
In 2007, Census Bureau statistics showed a growing percentage of people living in
poverty in Larimer County. The United Way of Larimer County, the lead non-profit
organization focused on health and human service issues in the community, started a
conversation about what could be done to turn this trend around before poverty became
too large of an issue to effectively address. In collaboration with Colorado State
University, Northern Colorado Economic Development Corporation, Fort Collins
Coloradoan, and other non-profit organizations, the Pathways Past Poverty Initiative
was created.
Pathways Past Poverty is about providing a basic support system for individuals and
families to succeed. A basic support system in place for individuals and families creates a
more stable workforce in the community. Material and social support can make the
difference between keeping and losing a job. Pathways Past Poverty is working to
accomplish this by focusing on:
Affordable housing
Childcare
Community awareness and support
Health and wellness
Transportation
As with the Homeward 2020 effort, city staff members are involved in various aspects of
the Pathways Past Poverty program.
1
ATTACHMENT 8
Other Governmental Entities and Non-Profit Organizations
Providing Social Services
Larimer County
State law (CRS 26-1-115) requires Larimer County, and all counties in Colorado, to
establish a department of social services which “shall consist of a county board of social
services, a county director of social services, and such additional employees as may be
necessary for the efficient performance of public assistance and welfare activities,
including but not limited to assistance payments, food stamps, and social services.”
There is no similar state law requiring municipalities to have a department of social
services and/or to provide any social services.
The same state law for counties requires the establishment of a "county social services
fund" which “shall consist of all moneys appropriated by the board of county
commissioners for public assistance and welfare and related purposes; all moneys
allotted, allocated, or apportioned to the county by the state department; such funds as are
granted to the state of Colorado by the federal government for public assistance and
welfare and related purposes and allocated to the county by the state department; and
such other moneys as may be provided from time to time from other sources.”
The Larimer County Department of Human Services has the following Mission
Statement:
To preserve and enhance the safety, self-sufficiency, and well being of low-
income and at-risk populations in Larimer County through delivery of state and
federally mandated benefit programs and services.
Thus, Larimer County operates programs for low income, elderly, disabled and minority
residents, providing financial assistance for shelter, food and medical care. Individual and
family programs protect adults and children, help people to become employed and assist
youth and families in properly handling their family and community conflicts.
United Way of Larimer County
The United Way of Larimer County solicits monetary contributions from individuals,
groups, organizations, and businesses and allocates financial assistance to various non-
profit agencies to provide social services in Fort Collins. Many of the agencies that
receive United Way funding also receive financial assistance from the City’s Human
Services Program and CDBG funds allocated through the competitive process. While
fund raising is an important aspect of the United Way of Larimer County, the
organization does much more than fundraising alone. They are a leader in creating long-
2
lasting changes by addressing underlying causes of the most pressing needs people face
in the community.
United Way of Larimer County works with various partners to support dozens of
programs and services that help people in the community by meeting basic needs,
creating opportunities for financial stability for families, and creating long-term solutions
to reduce needs now and prevent them in the future.
The United Way’s Pathways Past Poverty effort was briefly discussed above.
In addition to Pathways Past Poverty, the United Way of Larimer County is a major
referral service for social services in the community. The 2-1-1 Program is known as the
basic Community Connection to Services. If people need to know where to go for
clothing, food, rent, shelter, support groups, parenting, volunteerism, and other types of
community services, the can just call 2-1-1 for non-emergency assistance. United Way's
2-1-1 Call Center utilizes highly trained information and referral specialists who assist
the public and give answers regarding community services for the following:
Aging services
Disaster recovery
Donation referrals
Food, housing & utility assistance
Health & medical needs
Legal assistance
United Way's 2-1-1 information and referral specialists are skilled professionals who
assess callers' needs, determine their options and best course of action by directing them
to appropriate programs and services. Information and referral specialists provide
culturally appropriate support, intervene in crisis situations and advocate for the caller
and their unmet needs. Some needs go unmet due to a lack of resources, a caller's
ineligibility, or a lack of transportation.
It is easy for Health or Human Services providers to list their Agency in the 2-1-1
information and referral database. Inclusion in the database is free of charge.
Poudre Valley Health Systems
Poudre Valley Health System (PVHS) is a regional medical hub that includes Poudre
Valley Hospital, Medical Center of the Rockies, Mountain Crest Behavioral Health, and
the Family Medicine Center, and dozens of associated clinics and outpatient services.
PVHS provides health care and wellness services and products in Colorado, Nebraska
and Wyoming. Outpatient services include counseling services where licensed clinical
social workers provide counseling to patients and families at Poudre Valley Hospital and
Medical Center of the Rockies for a variety of psychological and social issues, including:
facilities and agencies licensed to
3
provide skilled nursing and rehabilitation services;
home health agencies;
assisted living centers;
inpatient and outpatient behavioral health/counseling;
crises intervention;
advance directives;
counseling related to end-of-life issues;
substance abuse;
domestic violence;
stress management;
emotional support; and
referrals to community agencies, including mental health and substance abuse
services, and adult and child protection teams.
Referrals to services and resources in the community include those for housing,
including the Fort Collins Housing Authority, shelters, and safehouses, food,
transportation, and low- or no-cost medical and prescription services.
Poudre R-1 School District
The Poudre R-1 School District has the following vision and mission about its purpose:
Vision:
Poudre School District exists to support and inspire every child to think, to learn,
to care, and to graduate prepared to be successful in a changing world.
Mission:
Educate…Every Child, Every Day.
In addition to providing education to children from Kindergarten through Grade 12, the
Poudre School District in the arena of social services also has early Childhood Programs
and a Department of Child Nutrition that serves meals to students. These are summarized
below.
Early Childhood Programs
Parental, Infant, and Toddler Offerings - Prenatal families and children, birth to
age 3
Quality services and support is available to families and children who meet Early
Head Start eligibility requirements.
Services Offered
4
Prenatal parent education support
Home visits
Education, hearing and vision screenings
Socialization opportunities through PACT (Parent and Child
Togetherness) events
Partnerships with local infant and toddler childcare centers
Preschool Offerings – Children, ages 3 to 5
Programs include:
Social/emotional skills development
Literacy and language development
Individualized academic plans
Individualized education plans
Services Available to All Families
Student screening and evaluations:
Age-appropriate child development screening
Hearing
Vision
Development Evaluation through Child Find
Family services and parenting education classes:
Parent classes
Male involvement program
PACT (Parent and Child Togetherness) events
General Education Development
English as a Second Language
Resources, services and community referrals/connections
Health and dental
Mental wellness
Food and housing
Child Nutrition
The Poudre School District’s Department of Child Nutrition provides safe, healthy,
nutritious, and well-balanced meals to the district’s students. All meals meet the
guidelines set forth by the US Department of Agriculture. Funding for the program
comes from the sale of meals and federal and state reimbursements.
5
Colorado State University
Early Childhood Center
The Early Childhood Center is the lab school for Colorado State University's Department
of Human Development and Family Studies Program. The Center offers a quality
program for young children, trains CSU students for careers in early childhood education,
and child life specialists, and provides opportunities for research related to children,
families, and early childhood education. The Center is dedicated to working in
partnership with families to ensure a quality educational experience for their children.
The Early Childhood Center is licensed by the Colorado Department of Human Services
and is staffed with degreed teachers with extensive education backgrounds and
experiences.
Meaningful educational experiences are planned in a caring atmosphere to promote the
physical, social, emotional and intellectual growth of each child. Through the
encouragement of self expression, curiosity and explorations of his/her own world, both
at home and at school, the preschool age child will develop a healthy self image, a sense
of responsibility, helpfulness, and will learn problem solving and decision making skills.
The purpose of the Center is threefold:
Teaching - to involve graduate and undergraduate students in observation and
participation experiences with young children.
Service - to serve the needs of children and their families for a half or full day
enriched environment.
Research - to provide opportunities for research related to children, families, and
early childhood education.
The Early Childhood Center is moving to a new facility, the former Washington School
on South Shields Street.
1
ATTACHMENT 9
Programs of Other Municipalities
Loveland
The City of Loveland’s approach to helping social service agencies is exactly the
approach used by the City of Fort Collins. Loveland uses Community Development
Block Grant funds provided by HUD to assist organizations in providing affordable
housing and supportive services to persons with low to moderate incomes. A minimum of
65% of CDBG funds are granted to agencies providing bricks and mortar projects; a
maximum of 15% of funds are granted for public service projects; and a maximum of
20% of the funds are set aside for program administration. Goals for the Loveland CDBG
Program are to:
Provide services to homeless persons in Loveland through shelter, case
management, transitional and/or permanent housing.
Create new housing and maintain existing housing opportunities for households
with low income.
Give funding priority to projects and activities that serve households earning 50%
or less of the area median income.
Implement and support the anti-poverty strategy by supporting agencies and
services that meet basic needs and provide tools for self-sufficiency to households
with low income.
Decrease poverty in the community by financially supporting services and
facilities that meet basic needs and provide self-sufficiency opportunities.
Loveland also has a Human Service Grant Program funded through the City’s General
Fund. The Fund provides grants to non-profit agencies for human services including
youth services, health care, childcare, domestic violence services and employment
assistance. The funds will be used to assist in meeting the needs of Loveland citizens
through services and projects that enhance stability, provide crisis prevention and lead to
self-sufficiency. Goals for the Human Services Grant Program are:
Financially support services such as those that provide food, shelter, physical and
mental health care as well as services that prevent crisis and assist in sustaining
independent living.
Support services that value diversity, foster self-sufficiency, treat people with
dignity, build self-respect, address issues of safety, and allow people to live free of
fear.
The following table summarizes the amount to funding available through the Human
Services Grant Program.
2
YEAR FUNDING
2006 $400,000
2007 $400,000
2008 $494,110
2009 $450,000
2010 $450,000
Greeley
The City of Greeley’s Urban Renewal Authority is the lead agency for the administration
of the City’s federal grant programs (CDBG and HOME) and implementation of the
Greeley’s Consolidated Plan. The Greeley Urban Renewal Authority is a division of the
City of Greeley’s Community Development Department.
Greeley works closely with the Greeley Housing Authority and local non-profit agencies
and organizations that provide services to the homeless and special needs populations.
The City promotes communication, cooperation, and collaboration among these groups
and, provides technical assistance to support non-profit agencies and organizations while
they pursue funding from local, state and federal sources.
Greeley’s CDBG Program has focused on “sticks and bricks” for affordable housing with
very little provided for public services. What public service money is provided goes to
assist homeless and at-risk families to help them move from homelessness to housing
self-sufficiency.
There is also a Greeley Youth Enrichment Program's whose purpose is to promote a
positive presence in the community that will result in a reduction of criminal activities
and provide recreational, educational, and cultural programs for Greeley youth and
citizenry. The community has both a role and responsibility to provide Greeley's youth
with a safe, friendly learning environment and to boost academic achievement
Greeley does not allocate any General Fund dollars to support social services.
Boulder
The City of Boulder approaches social issues from a broad community perspective,
working with non-profit organizations, school districts, higher education, and other local
governments, to plan for the future needs of Boulder residents and provide support for the
community to meet current human service needs.
The City provides:
information about and analysis of community social and human service issues;
development of community solutions to social concerns;
policy analysis and development;
surveys and assessments of needs, trends and best practices
3
technical assistance for non-profit organizations to build community capacity;
evaluation of city funding investments;
partnerships with community and government organizations to provide
comprehensive, coordinated, integrated human services; and
funding to non-profit organizations through the Human Services Fund.
The City of Boulder has a Human Services Fund that annually distributes approximately
$2.5 million to community agencies in support of the Housing and Human Services
Master Plan. Awards are made once every two years on a competitive basis. The City
supports programs and services consistent with funding priorities identified in the
Housing and Human Services Master Plan. Human Services Fund resources are
strategically invested to address specific community identified priorities by supporting
targeted programs rather than agencies or organizations. Through an emphasis on
measuring outcomes of services provided, the City expects to be able to report the results
and benefits of services it funds and, in time, show a measurable improvement in the
system of human services and quality of life in Boulder.
Child Care Subsidies
With funding from the City of Boulder and City of Longmont, the Child Care Subsidies
and Referrals Program, in partnership with the Colorado Child Care Assistance Program
(CCCAP), provides assistance in paying for child care to low income families.
Youth Opportunity Grants
Youth Opportunity Grants help provide cultural, educational, or recreational activities.
Youth Opportunity Grants are federal grants awarded to the City, and the rest of the
funding for youth opportunity and child care subsidies comes from City tax revenue.
Homeless Prevention
The Boulder County has a 10-Year Plan to End Homelessness and is organized around
six goals that are designed to have a significant impact on homelessness. Taken together,
these goals represent a comprehensive approach that addresses all facets of homelessness
by combining the development of a more efficient, effective and coordinated service
delivery system with the provision of needed services and housing options. These six
goals are:
1. Prevent individuals and families from becoming homeless.
2. Provide temporary shelter, alternative housing and supportive services for those
who are temporarily homeless.
3. Provide permanent housing with supportive services to meet the long-term needs
of chronic homeless individuals.
4. Develop and/or improve systems to support efficient and effective plan
implementation.
5. Promote public awareness and advocacy.
4
6. Implement an effective governance and staffing structure
Longmont
The City of Longmont annually contracts with local non-profit agencies to provide
services that address designated human service needs in the Longmont community. The
City of Longmont has transitioned to program funding (from general operating funding)
in order to align its process with the other funders. Longmont uses only a limited amount
of its CDBG funding for social services. Most funding for social services comes from
Longmont’s general Fund.
The City of Longmont funding can be used for programs and services that address the
following areas:
Stabilizing individuals and families to help them meet their basic needs: Examples of
services funded in this area include, but are not limited to:
Domestic violence, child and adult protection services
Emergency and transitional housing
Emergency food, clothing, and/or other temporary assistance
Health care (including dental and mental health services)
Ensuring that all residents have full access to services and resources: Examples of
services funded in this area include, but are not limited to:
Community outreach efforts that educate and/or link people with
services
Efforts that promote inclusion and culturally appropriate services
Legal services
Strengthening Children, Youth and Families: Examples of services funded in this area
include, but are not limited to:
Youth asset building
Prevention and intervention services for high-risk behavior
Parent education and support
Early education programs
Childcare for working parents
Supporting Self-sufficiency and Independence for Adults: Examples of services
funded in this area include, but are not limited to:
Support, employment, and/or training for people with disabilities
Transportation
Home-delivered and congregate meals
In-home services
Colorado Springs
5
The City of Colorado Springs provides funding to local non-profit agencies for the
provision of human services to low and moderate-income persons in the community.
These activities are governed by the federal regulations for the Community Development
Block Grant (CDBG) Program. City discretionary human services dollars and CDBG
fund help support programs that range from child care, to self-sufficiency, to emergency
care and shelter. Priority is given to non-profit agencies that provide the following
services:
Emergency Care and Shelter
Youth Services
Self-Sufficiency Services
For several years, the City has partnered with Pikes Peak United Way to create a
seamless application process for human service agencies. The process used to determine
funding for the nonprofit agencies consists of committees with representatives from the
City, United Way, the Non-Profit Center, the private sector, and the community at large.
These committees review all submitted proposals, attend agency presentations, and rate
the proposals based on relevant criteria. These ratings are then used to determine the
funding recommendations to City Council.
Homeless Program/Continuum of Care - Comprehensive Homeless Assistance Providers
The Comprehensive Homeless Assistance Providers (CHAP) is the focal point of
homeless assistance planning and service implementation in Colorado Springs. CHAP
coordinates homeless assistance activities and related supportive services; and acts as a
resource network and viable means of information sharing in the community. Each year
the City, Homeward Pikes Peak, and CHAP work together to update the Continuum of
Care for Homeless Services for Colorado Springs and make application for additional
grant funding under the competitive Continuum of Care process administered by the
Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD). In addition, Homeward Pikes
Peak is the coordinating agency in charge of the development of the Ten Year Plan to
End Homelessness.
1
1
October 25, 2011
City Council Work Session
Social Services Status and Scope
2
October 25, 2011 Work Session
PURPOSE:
• Review the City of Fort Collins’ current,
involvement in supporting the provision
of social services to the citizens of the
community.
• Determine the level of future
involvement in supporting the provision
of social services.
ATTACHMENT 10
2
3
DIRECTION SOUGHT AND SPECIFIC
QUESTIONS TO BE ADDRESSED
1. Any comments/questions about what the City
is currently doing in supporting the provision
of social services in the community?
2. Compared to what the City is currently doing
under the priorities of the Five-Year Strategic
Plan 2010-2014 (Consolidated Plan), does the
Council want to consider maintaining,
refocusing, or expanding the City’s efforts?
3. If Council wishes to expand the City’s current
efforts, what additional strategies should be
added to the current program?
4
Roles Municipalities Play in the Provision
of Social Services in their Communities:
1. Funders
2. Regulators
3. Partnerships/Participants and
Conveners/Leaders
4. Providers
3
5
The City of Fort Collins has:
1. An adopted human services policy (1992);
2. A strategic plan regarding its role in the
provision of social services in the community
(2010);
3. A listing in the strategic plan as to the priority
social service and affordable housing needs
of the community;
4. An established competitive process through
which the City makes decisions and allocates
financial assistance to social service
agencies (2000);
6
The City of Fort Collins has:
5. A Land Use Code that regulates the location
of various types of social services depending
upon their expected impacts and
compatibility with surrounding uses;
6. An involvement through participation in
partnerships with other governments and
organizations to strategically address priority
social service needs in the community.
4
7
City of Fort Collins as a
Social Services Funder
• Five-Year Strategic Plan 2010-2014
(Consolidated Plan) – adopted July 2010
– Required by the US Department of Housing
and Urban Development (HUD)
– Outlines how financial assistance from HUD
will be utilized to address the most
pressing affordable housing, public service,
and public facility needs in the community.
8
City of Fort Collins as a
Social Services Funder
• Community Development Block Grant (CDBG)
Program
– Maximum of 15% of CDBG funds can be
allocated to Public Services
(approximately $150,000)
• Human Services Program Fund
– Funding has ranged from $332,000 (in 2006)
to $540,334 (in 2011, which included
$150,733 of Keep Fort Collins Great
funding).
5
9
Funded Agencies
• Human Services Program funding supports a variety of
services; examples of funded agencies include:
– Boys & Girls Club
– Teaching Tree Early Childhood Development Center
– Catholic Charities
– Disabled Resource Services
– Education and Life Training Center
– Food Bank
– Neighbor-to-Neighbor
– Northern Colorado AIDS Project
– Project Self-Sufficiency
– Volunteers of America
10
City of Fort Collins as a
Social Services Regulator
• The City’s Land Use Code regulates the location of uses
that provide social services in the community.
– Offices and clinics
– Group homes
– Shelters for victims of domestic violence
– Long-term care facilities, including:
• Convalescent centers
• Nursing care facilities
• Intermediate health care facilities
• Independent living facilities
– Child care centers
– Day shelters
6
11
City of Fort Collins
Partnerships in
Social Service Provision
– Homeward 2020
– Pathways Past Poverty
12
City of Fort Collins as a
Provider of Social Services
• The City helps fund non-profit agencies
in their provision of a variety of social
services but is not a direct major
provider of traditional social services.
• The City does provide:
– transportation services
– recreation programs
– land/buildings
7
13
Other Governments and Organizations
Providing Social Services in Fort Collins
1. Larimer County
2. United Way of Larimer County
3. Poudre Valley Health Systems
4. Poudre R-1 School District
5. Colorado State University
14
Larimer County
• Required by state law (CRS 26-1-115) to
establish a department of social
services.
• Operates programs for low income,
elderly, disabled and minority
residents, providing financial
assistance for shelter, food and medical
care.
8
15
United Way of Larimer County
• Solicits monetary contributions and allocates
financial assistance to various non-profit
agencies to provide social services in Fort
Collins.
– Many agencies also receive financial
assistance from the City’s Human Services
Program and CDBG funds
• Pathways Past Poverty
• 2-1-1 information and referral specialists
16
Poudre Valley Health Systems
• Outpatient services include counseling
services where licensed clinical social
workers provide counseling to patients
and families.
9
17
Poudre R-1 School District
• Early Childhood Programs
• Department of Child Nutrition
18
Colorado State University
• Early Childhood Center is the lab
school for the Department of Human
Development and Family Studies
Program.
• Note: A separate October 25, 2011,
work session agenda item will address
the issue of early childhood education
in greater detail.
10
19
Programs of Other Municipalities
• Loveland
• Greeley
• Boulder
• Longmont
• Colorado Springs
20
Programs of Other Municipalities
• Greeley
– Focuses on “sticks and bricks” for affordable
housing
– Very little provided for public services
• Loveland
– Approach is exactly the same as Fort Collins.
– Use CDBG funds and a Human Service Grant
Program funded through the City’s General Fund.
• Boulder
– Broad community perspective, working with non-
profit organizations, school districts, higher
education, and other local governments.
– Human Services Fund that annually distributes
approximately $2.5 million.
11
21
Options to expand the City’s current role:
1. Create a Central Focal Point for the City’s
Efforts
2. Review, Revise, and Re-Adopt a City Social
Services Policy
3. Increase Funding of Social Services
4. Consider Code Changes
5. Consider Transportation Enhancements
6. Increase Intergovernmental and/or
Cooperation with Other Organizations
22
DIRECTION SOUGHT AND SPECIFIC
QUESTIONS TO BE ADDRESSED
1. Any comments/questions about what the City
is currently doing in supporting the provision
of social services in the community?
2. Compared to what the City is currently doing
under the priorities of the Five-Year Strategic
Plan 2010-2014 (Consolidated Plan), does the
Council want to consider maintaining,
refocusing, or expanding the City’s efforts?
3. If Council wishes to expand the City’s current
efforts, what additional strategies should be
added to the current program?
DATE: October 25, 2011
STAFF: Joe Frank
Tess Heffernan
Pre-taped staff presentation: available
at fcgov.com/clerk/agendas.php
WORK SESSION ITEM
FORT COLLINS CITY COUNCIL
SUBJECT FOR DISCUSSION
The City of Fort Collins’ Current and Potential Future Involvement in Early Childhood Care and
Education.
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Increasingly, communities across the nation are recognizing the many “triple bottom line” benefits
of accessible, affordable, and quality early childhood care and education. Quality child care benefits
the social and financial needs of parents, the educational and development needs of children, the
economy, and many other community development goals. City Council asked for more information
to help clarify the direction that it would take in regard to the City’s role and potential strategies in
regard to early childhood care and education. This issue is part of Council’s 2011/2012 Work Plan.
GENERAL DIRECTION SOUGHT AND SPECIFIC QUESTIONS TO BE ANSWERED
1. Does Council have any comments or questions about what the City is currently doing in the
area of facilitating early childhood care and education in the community?
2. Compared to what the City is currently doing, does the Council want to consider
maintaining, refocusing and/or expanding the City’s efforts in facilitating early childhood
care and education services in the community?
3. If Council wishes to modify the City’s current efforts, what additional strategies should be
added to the current program?
BACKGROUND / DISCUSSION
Increasingly, communities across the nation are recognizing the many “triple bottom line” benefits
of accessible, affordable, and quality early childhood care and education to the social and financial
needs of parents, the educational and development needs of children, to the economy, and to many
other community development goals. Studies have shown the communities that champion high
quality early childhood care and education reap immediate and long term rewards in economic
vitality, civic participation, school success and public safety. Early childhood, commonly defined
as the years between birth through eight years, is a critical time in human development.
October 25, 2011 Page 2
There are numerous examples across the country where local governments demonstrate the
important role they can play in ensuring adequate early childhood care and education programs by
creating policies, identifying local resources, and working with developers and community partners.
A list of “best practices” by local governments across the nation is provided in the attached report.
What’s Being Done in Fort Collins
There are multiple public and private organizations, agencies and businesses involved in early
childhood care and education. A detailed description of the roles and responsibilities is provided
in the attached report (Attachment 1). Briefly, the key players and their respective roles are as
follows:
• State of Colorado - licensing and financial assistance (Colorado Child Care Assistance
Program (CCAP) – funding has been dropped and no new applications are being taken)
• Larimer County – inspections and financial assistance (administers CCAP))
• Early Childhood Council of Larimer County – leading non-profit that counsels families in
finding child care; provides support and training of child care providers; raises awareness
about issues impacting children; raises standards of early care and learning; etc.
• Pathways Past Poverty Child Care Access Committee – focuses on education of employees
and employers
• Colorado State University Early Childhood Center – trains students for careers in childhood
education; is a campus resource for early childhood education; and operates an early
childhood center.
• Non-profit and for-profit child care facilities. In Fort Collins, there are approximately 33
child care centers; 124 family child care homes; 39 preschool child care facilities; and 34
school age child care facilities.
• Poudre School District – provides quality preschool; offers prenatal, infant, toddler, and
developmentally disabled services; and partners with local child care centers.
• City of Fort Collins – adopted childcare policies as part of City Plan (2010); since 2002,
has allocated nearly $1.4 million of Community Development Block Grant Funds and
Human Services Funds for child care services; has identified child care, in particular
subsidized or free child care, as a priority need in the adopted Consolidated Housing
and Community Development Plan (2010); child care centers are listed as a permitted
use in 23 of 28 zoning districts; and, City employees are provided child care benefits.
Research Results
City staff conducted a review of existing research, inventoried current roles and programs in Larimer
County, conducted interviews with several local stakeholders, and collected information about “best
practices” across the nation . A summary of the results of the research and interviews is provided
in the attached report. Some key findings from this include:
• Research has clearly shown that early childhood care and education benefits the community
(Source: Early Childhood Education for All, recommendations from a conference sponsored
by Legal Momentum Family Initiative and the MIT Workplace Center, 2005). Some key
findings include:
October 25, 2011 Page 3
N Every dollar invested in quality early childhood care and education saves taxpayers
up to thirteen dollars in future costs. The Perry Preschool Study followed
participants in a high-quality program for more than 40 years and found that, as
adults, they were less likely to be arrested, more likely to own a home, and more
likely to be employed.
N Quality early childhood care and education prepares young children to succeed in
school and become better citizens; they earn more, pay more taxes, and commit
fewer crimes.
• There are potential short and long term actions and strategies that blend well with the
traditional role and services of the City of Fort Collins.
• Child care contributes to the local economy by supporting parents and local employers.
• Accessible, affordable, and quality child care benefits the social and financial needs of
parents and the educational and development needs of children.
• The location and availability of child care supports other community development principles
and policies including community and neighborhood livability, sustainability, and
transportation mobility.
• The largest gap is affordability. According to the U.S Census, low-income parents spend
the largest percentage of income on child care or are forced to exit the regulated child care
system and seek care in informal settings. The fact is that quality child care is expensive.
• The biggest barriers are state regulations.
• City partnerships are important to overcome challenges of improving the local child care
system.
• The City organization could be a model for other employers in the community.
Potential Strategies
Potential options that appear to be relevant and appropriate for the City to consider in addressing
the above conditions are listed below. All of the actions listed will require some level of resources
to study and implement. All of the actions are new and are not on any City department’s current
work program; any new work program actions would need to be evaluated in terms of their
relationship to City policies in the City’s adopted plans (e.g., City Plan; Consolidated Housing and
Community Development Plan; and Economic Action Plan), their effectiveness in facilitating
quality early childhood care and education, and impacts on current work program priorities and
resources. City staff has provided an estimate of the order of magnitude of the resources required
for each of the potential strategies, as follows:
October 25, 2011 Page 4
$ - requires in-house staff time; minimal public process.
$$ - requires more staff resources, time, and dollars for research and study; may need consultant
services; may include deferral of current revenues; and, some more public process to
implement.
$$$ - requires the most staff resources, time and dollars; may depend upon future BFO allocations,
state or federal funding; and significant public process to implement.
1. Explore adding new policies in existing plans, such as City Plan, Economic Action Plan,
and the Consolidated Housing and Community Development Plan, addressing topics
such as:
• Site child care facilities near employment centers, homes, schools, community centers, etc.
(City Plan). $
• Encourage and educate employers to support child care for their employees (City Plan). $
• Encourage retention of existing and development of new child care facilities in
neighborhoods (City Plan and Economic Action Plan). $
• Incorporate child care and social services into affordable housing, activity centers, and
transportation hubs (City Plan and Consolidated Plan). $
• Give priority of local funding (CDBG/HSP) for child care services, particularly for low
income families (City Plan and Consolidated Plan). $
• Encourage partnerships that support early childhood care and education (City Plan). $
2. Explore actions that can increase the supply and affordability of child care, such as:
• Seek federal grant opportunities for building new centers. $$
• ncrease General Fund contributions to the City’s Human Services Program Fund earmarked
for child care services, particularly for lower income families. $$$
• Remove any potential barriers to the construction or new centers in the Land Use Code; in
particular explore barriers resulting from the City’s “change of use” regulations. $
• Create incentives for construction of new child care centers (particularly those serving low
income families) such as currently provided for affordable housing projects, including
priority processing, impact fee delay, development review fee waiver, administrative
construction fee waiver, etc. $ - $$
• Create incentives for existing child care facilities to provide sliding scale reduction to
parents. The scale decides how much a family will pay based on their income, family size,
and number of children in care. $ - $$
• Create new Land Use Code regulations and/or incentives for siting facilities such as near
transit and major employment centers. $ - $$
• Prepare information, e.g., a planning guide for how to start a child care facility, addressing
Land Use Code and building code requirements, funding opportunities, links to other child
care resources, etc. $ - $$
• Link transit hubs with child care facilities. $ - $$$
• Promote child care facilities in the City’s Transit Oriented Development overlay zone and
in the new planned unit development regulations (under construction). $
• Make amendments to the Land Use Code such as adding child care centers to the list of
permitted uses in the Neighborhood Conservation Low Density zone district subject to
administrative review; and, in all four of the zone districts which permit child care centers
October 25, 2011 Page 5
subject to review by the Planning and Zoning Board, make them subject to administrative
review. $
3. Explore actions that the City of Fort Collins can take to provide leadership in building
community support for early childhood care and education, such as:
• Model ways for other employers in the community, such as conducting a survey of City
employees regarding their need for child care services; explore expanded child care benefits;
offer child care learning opportunities; and add a link in City Net for child care information.
$$ - $$$
• Partner with child care centers utilizing their facilities for City outreach and education
activities. $
• Monitor and advocate for early childhood care legislation and funding at the federal, state
and local level; and, in particular with regard to easing unnecessary/overly restrictive state
rules and regulations and licensing requirements. $$
• Expand duties of an existing board or commission to include early childhood care and
education. $
• Look for a community partner(s), such as the Early Childhood Council of Larimer County,
to take the lead role for early childhood care and education in our community; provide child
care information to the City, employers, employer organizations, and employees; conduct
periodic survey families and analysis of demographic data to determine anticipated child
care needs; and, monitor and advise the City on state and federal legislation. Consider City
support and partnership opportunities, where appropriate, for instance underwriting events
and studies. $ - $$
• Collaborate with public and private organizations in the funding and potential construction
of one to two new child care center facilities in “south Fort Collins” and in the Mason
Corridor, primarily serving low income families. $ - $$$
• Add an indicator to the City Plan Monitoring program regarding early childhood care and
education. $
• Consider child care in the City’s disaster relief planning. $$
• Long term funding, such as a special sales tax (consider combining early childhood care and
education, human services, and affordable housing). $$$
4. Explore actions that build in early childhood care and education in the City’s economic
policies and actions, such as:
• Imbed economic information about early childhood care and education in business and
economic development marketing materials. $
• Find opportunities to educate/inform development community about early childhood care
and education, particularly low-income housing developers, and businesses employing low
income persons. $
• Utilize City financial incentives (e.g., tax increment financing,) to the provision of child care
facilities. $
• Find opportunities and partnerships (Chamber of Commerce, CSU, SBA, etc.) to incubate
child care centers, such as business management and “back office” training to child care
providers; and actions to foster the creation of a number of family child care homes. $$
October 25, 2011 Page 6
5. Explore actions that increase access to transit, such as:
• Increase hours of operation and frequency so that parents can get their children to child care
and still be at work on time. $$$
• Collaborate with public and private organizations in the funding and potential construction
of a new child care center facility in the Mason Corridor/BRT system, adjacent to future
stations and transit centers, particularly facilities serving low income families. $ - $$$
• Federal and state transportation grant opportunities. $$ - $$$
ATTACHMENTS
1. Snapshot Report entitled “Sustainable Community Development: Early Childhood Care and
Education” (2011), prepared by the Advance Planning Department
2. Powerpoint presentation
Snapshot Report
Sustainable Community Development:
Early Childhood Care and Education
ATTACHMENT 1
Snapshot Report
Sustainable Community Development:
Early Childhood Care and Education
October 18, 2011
Advance Planning
281 North College Avenue
Fort Collins, CO 80524
970-221-6376
fcgov.com/advanceplanning
SUSTAINABLE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT: EARLY CHILDHOOD CARE AND EDUCATION 1
INTRODUCTION
The City of Fort Collins is committed to sustainability as a core value. Increasingly,
communities across the nation are recognizing the many “triple bottom line” benefits of
accessible, affordable, and quality early childhood care and education to the social and
financial needs of parents, the educational and development needs of children, to the
economy, and to many other community development goals. Studies have shown the
communities that champion high quality early childhood care and education reap immediate
and long term rewards in economic vitality, civic participation, school success and public
safety. Early childhood, commonly defined as the years between birth through eight years, is
a critical time in human development.
There are numerous examples across the country where local governments demonstrate the
important role they can play in ensuring adequate early childhood care and education
programs by creating policies, identifying local resources, and working with developers and
community partners.
City Council asked for more information to help clarify the direction that they would look to
take in regard to the City’s role and potential strategies in regard to early childhood care and
education. The purpose of this report is to provide background information on the subject,
the role that local governments can play, and some policy and action strategy options to
consider. This issue is part of their 2011/2012 work plan.
There are a variety of related issues regarding early childhood care and education not
covered in this report and not connected to the traditional role, services and facilities that
the City provides. The issues currently being addressed by other national, regional or local
groups and organizations include: health, education and safety initiatives for children; early
childhood teacher professional development; other family support activities; and, the pros
and cons debate of institutional child care.
Some Facts and Observations about Early Childhood Care and
Education in Fort Collins, Larimer County and Nationwide
City staff conducted a review of existing research of early childhood care and education in
Larimer County and conducted interviews with several local stakeholders. A summary of the
results of the research and interviews follows:
1. In 2010, the Early Childhood Council of Larimer County (ECCLC) published a report entitled
“Study of Projected Demand and Impact of Early Care and Education Services in Larimer
County, Colorado”. A few key findings of that study included:
The three top forms of child care were: child care centers (35%); family child care
homes (32%); and relative/friend (13%). A child care center cares for children in large
groups. Family child care homes offer care in the provider’s home and may have a
total of six children, with two children under the age of two. Relative/friend child
care often is provided by a grandparent, aunt or other relative/friend of the family.
The other types of child care include before- or after-school programs; part-day
preschool; and, nanny’s (in-home day care).
35% of parents with children under 12 use some form of care.
2 SUSTAINABLE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT: EARLY CHILDHOOD CARE AND EDUCATION
95% of parents need to go to work; 19% need child care to attend school.
Over 76% of the children in child care are infants to 5 years old.
Parents surveyed were mostly satisfied with the child care option they chose.
Cost was the overall biggest challenge parents faced; other challenges included finding
an open slot, hours of operation (18% of parents indicated a need for evening or
weekend care), poor quality, changing work schedules and transportation.
Lower income families had more children in child care than other income groups.
79% of families pay full cost; 13% receive some third party aid; and, 6% receive free
care from a relative or friend.
75% of families report a lack of child care options for their children with special needs.
25% of child care users are single parents and custodial grandparents, yet they make
up only 2.4% and .5%, respectively, of the general population.
Two-thirds of businesses offer no child care benefits; and one-half don’t believe any of
their employees require child care benefits.
One out of six employers indicated that their employees had child care issues. Yet
parents reported absenteeism due to child care issues at a much higher rate than
employers, meaning employers may not be fully aware of the reasons behind an
employee’s absences.
74% of parents said they would need to drop out of school or reduce working hours if
child care were unavailable.
Generally, current demand for child care space exceeds capacity reported by child
care facilities, and open time slots and locations may not match the current demand.
Enrollment rates are projected to increase and will exceed the 2010 capacity in future
years; a 22.5% enrollment increase is projected by 2020.
2. Some other EECLC information:
Full-time cost of care in child care centers varies by age from 0-12 months
($13,898/yr) to 5-6 years ($9,124/yr); the cost of family child care homes is slightly
less.
In 2009, child day care services in Larimer County represented an annual payroll of
$13.6 million and 820 jobs; the total financial impact was estimated at more than $30
million annually.
3. A 2006 survey of economic developers and chamber of commerce leaders in the State of
New York found that:
83% agree that child care should be part of economic development policy.
82% recognize that a lack of affordable, quality, convenient child care reduces worker
productivity.
67% feel that businesses’ ability to attract and retain workers is hurt by lack of quality
child care.
4. Summary of information from City interviews conducted for this Study:
State funding for the Colorado Child Care Assistance Program (CCAP) has been cut and
the reimbursement rate dropped 7.5%; non-profit child care centers that offer sliding
scale fees have waiting lists; and, for-profit child care centers who cannot afford
sliding scale fees have openings they cannot fill.
SUSTAINABLE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT: EARLY CHILDHOOD CARE AND EDUCATION 3
Between February 2007 and June 2008, five child care centers closed. All of them
were located in Fort Collins. Four of the five served significant numbers of CCAP
children. The fifth did not accept CCAP. Closures were due to a number of issues, but
financial viability was a factor for several of them.
In the summer of 2011, two child care centers closed, one in Fort Collins and one in
Loveland. Both of these facilities served a significant number of CCAP children. Lack
of financial viability appears to have been the primary reason for closure of both sites.
Regulations from both the Colorado Department of Public Health and Environment and
the Colorado Department of Human Services, create the biggest challenges for child
care providers; particularly licensing requirements and health regulations; and more
changes are forthcoming that while may be good for children will be costly for
providers, particularly family child care homes.
The City is a good place to do business, but some child care centers would like to
partner with the City more. For example: partnering with the City’s bicycle program;
City staff making presentations to kids regarding City services and programs; use of
volunteers; use of community gardens for growing food; and, more use of parks.
Lack of transportation for lower income parents continues to be a significant problem;
Transfort hours do not begin early enough or go late enough for many jobs; lack of
Sunday service; and, often requires multiple transfers that results in parents who need
to rely on public transit are unable to first drop off children and then get to work on
time.
Many part-time employed parents cannot find space in family child care homes
because service providers cannot make it cost effective. If family child care home
providers could take more children than currently allowed, this could ease the burden.
However, staff does regularly hear complaints from neighbors of family child care
homes (traffic, idling, etc.).
There is some confusion amongst family child care home providers regarding City
regulations of child care centers and family child care homes, particularly regarding
limits on the number of children allowed in family child care homes.
Most zone districts in the City allow child care centers, and most require a
development review process, with neighborhood participation.
A new child care center that is a change of use triggers building code and fire
department regulations (in addition to the zoning regulations). This can be costly for
opening new child care centers in existing development, for instance in the Downtown
area.
On-site child care in a business is probably not cost effective, except maybe for the
very largest employers.
Low income families, particularly single parent households, need the most
personalized help finding affordable, quality, and convenient (location and hours of
operation) child care; this means sliding scale fees, employer provided benefits etc.,
to bridge the cost gap.
A lot of families are starting to split shifts – parents working night and day shifts – to
share child care.
The biggest need for early childhood care right now is for low income families,
generally provided by non-profit providers. One non-profit provider remarked that
they have a waiting list of 47 families; and, the for-profit providers said they could fill
vacant slots if there were more subsidies.
4 SUSTAINABLE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT: EARLY CHILDHOOD CARE AND EDUCATION
5. Other information:
Children who have received high quality child care score higher on tests of both
cognitive and social skills in their early teens than children in low quality care.
(Source: Rhode Island KIDS Count [2005])
Families at all income levels have difficulty accessing infant and toddler care; care for
sick children; and, care offered during non-traditional hours (Source: Pathways Past
Poverty Child Care Access Committee Position Statement [2008]).
What are the “Best Practices in Early Childhood Care and Education by
Local Governments Across the Nation?
Many local governments are concerned with the health of their communities and regions, and
regularly confront issues that affect families. The issue of early childhood care and education
is drawing growing concern and action by many communities. The following is a sampling of
actions by local governments across the nation.
1. Local actions and strategies to increase the supply of early childhood care and education
facilities:
Watsonville, CA, integrated child care facilities into its downtown bus station. This
enables parents to efficiently drop off their children via public transportation.
Delano, CA, requires a child care needs assessment for new development projects.
White Plains, NY, expanded the number of zone districts allowing child care facilities.
San Diego, CA, allows child care centers “by right” in all non-residential zones.
San Mateo, CA, prepared a step by step permitting guide for new child care facilities.
Riverside, CA, has expedited fast-track permitting of child care centers.
Some cities have worked with affordable housing and private developers to
incorporate child care facilities into development plans.
In Salinas, CA, a new affordable housing project was designed so that all the homes
could facilitate the provision of family child care.
San Mateo County, CA includes onsite child care as one of many traffic mitigation
measures available to large development projects.
Many cities have included child care policies in their comprehensive plans, such as:
o Requiring mitigation if a significant impact (upon child care) by large, new
development is identified (Alameda County, Ca).
o Siting of child care facilities near employment centers, homes, schools,
community centers, etc (Union City, CA).
o Encouraging employers to support child care for their employees (City of Taft,
CA).
o Encouraging retention of existing and development of new child care facilities
in neighborhoods (City of Los Angeles, CA).
o Incorporating child care and social services into affordable housing (City of
Fairfield, CA).
o Preparing a joint public/private child care master plan (Port Hueneme, CA).
SUSTAINABLE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT: EARLY CHILDHOOD CARE AND EDUCATION 5
2. Local actions and strategies in building community partnerships for early childhood care
and education by the broader community:
In Santa Monica, the City and the Santa Monica College designed and built an early
childhood care and education center in its new Civic Center. It will also serve as a
learning laboratory for the college’s early childhood education students.
Fairfax County, Virginia, committed to ensure that designated space for school-age
child care was included in every new and renovated school, using general obligation
bonds to fund construction.
The City/County of Denver recently announced READY KIDS DENVER, which calls on the
City to take a leadership position and act as a focal point for a public/private effort on
early childhood care and education, looking at what services already exist, the gaps,
and how to direct existing resources to better meet the needs.
Shady Grove, Maryland built a child care facility as part of a new Metro station, in a
public/private partnership that involved 11 funders and the school district.
3. Actions and strategies that build early childhood care and education into local economic
development and funding activities and strategies:
The City of South San Francisco built a 100-student child care center in an office park
to help retain and grow its significant biotech industry. The redevelopment agency
used $2.7 million of bond funds to construct the facility and then leased it to a non-
profit operator.
In San Jose and San Mateo County, CA, a joint public/private partnership funds family
child care home business development projects.
Several cities support consortia of family child care centers providers to help them
access economies of scale in purchasing and management.
Some cities provide community outreach regarding tax credits and subsidies for
families.
The City of San Jose, CA made $1.5 million of redevelopment funds available to child
care developers through a Request for Proposal process.
In Minneapolis, MN, a community based strategy sets up an early childhood care and
education incubator for the creation of a number of small child care businesses.
Kern County, CA eliminated its building permit fee for child care facilities.
Livermore, CA (as well as many more CA cities and counties) instituted a developers
impact fee to fund community facilities including child care and senior centers and
facilities for the disabled.
Federal CDBG funds commonly subsidize child care operations or facility construction
and renovation for low-income populations.
Some cities have used transportation dollars, such as Congestion Mitigation and Air
Quality funds, to study and build child care facilities at transit stops, park-n-ride
locations and other alternative transportation hubs.
The City of Aspen is among a handful of communities in the country that funds quality
child care through a dedicated sales tax. Aspen’s Kids First programs and services are
funded through a .45% sales tax (also includes affordable housing), with a focus on
supporting infant and toddler programs with operating funding; funding quality
improvements and capital improvements for all licensed child care in Pitkin County;
direct financial aid to working families; and, funding for professional development,
retention and reward of teachers. The Kids First program is a department of the City.
6 SUSTAINABLE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT: EARLY CHILDHOOD CARE AND EDUCATION
What’s Being Done in Fort Collins?
There are multiple public and private organizations, agencies and businesses involved in early
childhood care and education as follows:
1. State of Colorado. The Colorado Department of Human Services (CDHS) licenses child care
operations caring for more than two unrelated children; the State of Colorado requires child
care centers and family child care home providers to be licensed; the State does not license
in-home (nannies) caregivers or relative/friend care. The CDHS Division of Child Care is the
lead agency on the Colorado Child Care Assistance Program (CCAP). CCAP provides financial
assistance to low-income families that are working, searching for employment or in training,
and families that are enrolled in the Colorado Works Program and need child care services
to support their efforts toward self-sufficiency. Effective March 1, 2010, enrollment in the
program was suspended. There is a waiting list of new applicants. CCAP is administered
through county departments of social/human services. Counties set eligibility for
families, but must serve families that have income of 130% or less of the federal poverty
guideline and may not serve families that have incomes over 225% of federal poverty level.
2. Larimer County provides the following child care services:
Sanitation and safety – inspects operations of seven or more children; evaluates
compliance with applicable regulations; and provides education and resource
materials.
Administers the Colorado Child Care Assistance Program (CCAP) for Larimer County
residents.
3. Early Childhood Council of Larimer County (ECCLC) is the leading non-profit organization
that convenes professionals, families and policy makers to raise awareness about issues
impacting children from birth to age eight. More specifically, the ECCLC:
Provides a foundation of support and helps connect families to essential resources.
Assists families in navigating the child care system, providing information about
quality care and connecting families to child care options that meet their needs.
Supports business by helping employees find and maintain child care.
Raises standards of early care and learning.
Connects providers to professional growth opportunities.
Focuses on the interests and challenges affecting the provider’s ability to meet the
evolving need of children.
Provides support and training of child care providers.
4. Pathways Past Poverty (P3) Child Care Access Committee is a subset of P3, currently
focusing on education of employers and employees. The Committee is planning three
business summits this fall to discuss child care as a workforce issue and plans to host a
community forum in the spring.
SUSTAINABLE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT: EARLY CHILDHOOD CARE AND EDUCATION 7
4. Colorado State University (CSU) Early Childhood Center (ECC) has a three-fold mission:
1) Train students for careers in early childhood education and programming.
2) Provide a nurturing environment that utilizes evidence-based best practices to support
the development of young children and their families.
3) Serve as a campus resource for research and discovery into child and family
development and early childhood education.
CSU currently operates an early childhood center and is expanding into new space in
Washington School. The new space will enable them to expand from a preschool-only
program to a full-age, full week, year around program; with slots for 100 FTE children,
primarily for CSU students, faculty and staff, and, as space permits, children from the rest of
the Fort Collins community.
6. Non-profit and for-profit child care facilities. In Fort Collins, there are approximately 33
child care centers; 124 family child care homes; 39 preschool child care facilities; and. 34
school age child care facilities (Source: ECCLC, 2010).
7. Poudre School District (PSD) provides services and support to families who meet the
federal Early Head Start eligibility requirements (low income, looking for a job, or teen
mothers who are in school). Quality preschool, both no cost and tuition based, is available
through PSD’s Early Childhood Program for children ages three to five years old, in 20
elementary schools. PSD offers prenatal, infant and toddler services (birth to age three),
including prenatal parent education support; home visits; educational, hearing and vision
screenings; socialization opportunities; and, partnerships with local child care centers. PSD
also provides developmentally appropriate early child education; family services; referrals;
and, parenting education classes.
8. City of Fort Collins (CFC)
CFC City Plan (2010) Policies:
o Child care is indirectly addressed in the Economic Health Chapter, in the paragraph
entitled “human” on page 18 of the Economic Health Chapter, under the umbrella of
“self sufficiency” and “services and infrastructure that contribute to their quality of
life”.
o The Community and Neighborhood Livability Chapter directly mentions child care
as a “supporting use” in all neighborhoods, including: Urban Estate Neighborhoods (LIV
27.3, page 78), Low Density Mixed-Use Neighborhoods (LIV 28.2, page 79); and,
Medium Density Mixed-Use Neighborhoods (LIV 29.2, page 80). Child care as a
“supporting use” is mentioned in all of the “Districts”, including: Downtown District
(LIV 33.6, page 86); General Commercial Districts (LIV 34.2, page 87); Community
Commercial Districts (LIV 35.2, page 88); Neighborhood Commercial Districts (LIV 36.1,
page 89); Employment District (LIV 38.1, page 91); and, the Industrial District (LIV
39.1, page 92).
o Child care is also indirectly addressed in the policies for neighborhood schools in
regard to coordinating with the school districts in the use of schools by “providing
opportunities such as…neighborhood…services” (LIV 24.2, page 76).
o The topic of early childhood care and education is directly addressed in the Safety
and Wellness Chapter, including: “background” section (page 102), as follows:
“Access to community services, including education and early care, can have a
positive impact on the economic vitality of the community through increased
8 SUSTAINABLE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT: EARLY CHILDHOOD CARE AND EDUCATION
workforce productivity and well-being, as well as providing benefits to the
community as a whole.”
o Early childhood care is indirectly mentioned under the umbrella of human services
in the policy – “Coordinate with Health and Human Service Providers” (SW2.5, page
105) as follows:
“Rely on health and human service organizations to provide community health
and human services, and focus on improved communication, education,
accessibility, and collaboration in order to enhance overall physical and mental
health, safety, and wellness of the community. Allocate funds to the Human
Services Program to assist local human service providers.”
o And, “Consider the location of and Transportation to Health and Human Services”
(SW2.6, page 105), as follows:
“Encourage health and human service providers to carefully consider locations
of new facilities and transportation implications, provide transportation to
services, and coordinate with the public transportation system.”
o The topic is also indirectly addressed under the umbrella of human services in the
High Performing Community Chapter, including: the policies promoting “a learning
community” (HI 2, page 116); and, collaboration with public, private and non-profit
organizations (HI 4, page 117; HI 4.5, page 118).
o Child care is indirectly addressed under the umbrella of human services in the
Transportation Chapter, including: the policy for “access to Health and Human
Services” (T 10.7, page 128); and, “safety of school age children” (T12.7, page 129).
CFC Competitive Process Funding. Since 2002, the City has allocated nearly $1.4
million of Community Development Block Grant Funds (CDBG) and Human Services
Program (HSP) funds for child care services. Services and programs funded included
sliding scale fee tuition assistance; after-school and school-break child care and youth
activities; and nutritious meals, representing 14,490 child slots in these programs.
The funding for child care represents approximately 35% of the total CDBG and HSP
funds. See attached chart entitled “HSP and CDBG Child Care Funding History”.
CFC Consolidated Housing & Community Development Plan: FY2010-2014 (2010). This
Plan, required by HUD, describes an estimate of need and defines how the City
anticipates it will spend its federal funds on such things as affordable housing, and
public facilities and services. Child care falls under the category of public facilities
and services; and is identified as a high priority “community development needs”.
One of the unmet needs identified in the Plan is subsidized or free child care,
particularly for very-low-income households.
CFC Land Use Code. Child care centers (six or more children) are permitted in every
zone district except the Neighborhood Conservation Low Density District, Residential
Foothills District, Rural Lands District, River Conservation District, and Public Open
Lands District. Ten of the eighteen zone districts that permit child care centers
require administrative review (hearing officer) of new child care centers; four zone
districts require staff review; and, four zone districts require Planning and Zoning
Board approval. Family child care homes, relative/friend care, etc., are not regulated
by the Land Use Code.
CFC Employee benefits.
SUSTAINABLE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT: EARLY CHILDHOOD CARE AND EDUCATION 9
o The City of Fort Collins has contracted with Family Care Connections, Inc. to
provide employees with 100 hours per year of child care when other child care options
fall through and the employee needs to be at work. Employees pay a co-pay and the
hourly cost is subsidized by the City.
o The City provides child care referral services through its Employee Assistance
Program Provider, Managed Health Network (MHN). Care consultant’s help employees
assess child care needs, understand service options and costs, identify and evaluate
child care options and special needs resources, and connect with child care providers.
o Employees may take sick leave to take care of an ill child, to attend medical
appointments, or when an employee adopts a child or receives a foster child.
o Employees may take Parent Academic Activities Leave for academic activities.
o The City offers Flexible Spending Accounts for Dependant Care expenses.
o The City allows the use of flexible schedules and hours for child care where
such schedules reasonably coincide with the needs of the department and the public.
Potential Options for Future City Role, Actions and Strategies
Some key findings that should be considered in the City’s future policies and actions related
to early childhood care and education includes:
Research has clearly shown that early childhood care and education benefits the
community (Source: Early Childhood Education for All, recommendations from a
conference sponsored by Legal Momentum Family Initiative and the MIT Workplace
Center, 2005). Some key findings include:
o Every dollar invested in quality early childhood care and education
saves taxpayers up to thirteen dollars in future costs. The Perry Preschool
Study followed participants in a high-quality program for more than 40 years
and found that, as adults, they were less likely to be arrested, more likely to
own a home, and more likely to be employed (Schweinhart et al, 2005).
o Quality early childhood care and education prepares young children to
succeed in school and become better citizens; they earn more, pay more taxes,
and commit fewer crimes.
There are potential short and long term actions and strategies that blend well with the
traditional role and services of the City of Fort Collins.
Child care contributes to the local economy by supporting parents and local
employers.
Accessible, affordable, and quality child care benefits the social and financial needs of
parents and the educational and development needs of children.
The location and availability of child care supports other community development
principles and policies including community and neighborhood livability, sustainability,
and transportation mobility.
The largest gap is affordability. According to the U.S Census, low-income parents
spend the largest percentage of income on child care or are forced to exit the
regulated child care system and seek care in informal settings. The fact is that quality
child care is expensive.
The biggest barriers are state regulations.
City partnerships are important to overcome challenges of improving the local child
care system.
The City organization could be a model for other employers in the community.
10 SUSTAINABLE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT: EARLY CHILDHOOD CARE AND EDUCATION
Potential options that appear to be relevant and appropriate for the City to consider in
addressing the above conditions are listed below. All of the actions listed will require some
level of resources to study and implement. All of the actions are new and are not on any City
department’s current work program; any new work program actions would need to be
evaluated in terms of their relationship to City policies and goals in the City’s adopted plans
(e.g., City Plan; Consolidated Housing & Community Development Plan, and, Economic Action
Plan, their effectiveness in facilitating quality early childhood care and education, and
impacts on current work program priorities and resources. City staff has provided an
estimate of the order of magnitude of the resources required for each of the potential
strategies, as follows:
$ - requires in-house staff time, minimal public process.
$$ - requires more staff resources, time, and dollars for research and study; may need
consultant services; may include deferral of current revenues; and, some public process to
implement.
$$$ - requires most staff resources, time and dollars; may depend upon future BFO
allocations, state or federal funding; and, significant public process to implement.
1. Explore adding new policies in existing plans, such as City Plan, Economic Action
Plan, and the Consolidated Housing & Community Development Plan, addressing topics
such as:
Site child care facilities near employment centers, homes, schools, community
centers, etc. (City Plan). $
Encourage and educate employers to support child care for their employees (City
Plan). $
Encourage retention of existing and development of new child care facilities in
neighborhoods (City Plan and Economic Action Plan). $
Incorporate child care and social services into affordable housing, activity centers, and
transportation hubs (City Plan and Consolidated Plan). $
Give priority of local funding (CDBG/HSP) for child care services, particularly for low
income families (City Plan and Consolidated Plan). $
Encourage partnerships that support early childhood care and education (City Plan). $
2. Explore actions that can increase the supply and affordability of child care, such as:
Seek federal grant opportunities for building new centers. $$
Increase General Fund contributions to the City’s Human Services Program Fund
earmarked for child care services, particularly for lower income families. $$$
Remove any potential barriers to the construction or new centers in the Land Use
Code; in particular explore barriers resulting from the City’s “change of use”
regulations. $
Create incentives for construction of new child care centers (particularly those serving
low income families) such as currently provided for affordable housing projects,
including priority processing, impact fee delay, development review fee waiver,
administrative construction fee waiver, etc.. $-$$
Create incentives for existing child care facilities to provide sliding scale reduction to
parents. The scale decides how much a family will pay based on their income, family
size, and number of children in care. $-$$
SUSTAINABLE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT: EARLY CHILDHOOD CARE AND EDUCATION 11
Create new Land Use Code regulations and/or incentives for siting facilities such as
near transit and major employment centers. $-$$
Prepare information, e.g., a planning guide, for how to start a child care facility,
addressing Land Use Code and building code requirements, funding opportunities, links
to other child care resources, etc.. $-$$
Link transit hubs with child care facilities. $-$$$
Promote child care facilities in the City’s Transit Oriented Development overlay zone
and in the new planned unit development regulations (under construction). $
Make amendments to the Land Use Code such as adding child care centers to the list of
permitted uses in the Neighborhood Conservation Low Density zone district subject to
administrative review; and, in all four of the zone districts which permit child care
centers subject to review by the Planning and Zoning Board, make them subject to
administrative review. $
3. Explore actions that the City of Fort Collins can take to provide leadership in building
community support for early childhood care and education, such as:
Model ways for other employers in the community, such as conducting a survey of City
employees regarding their need for child care services; explore expanded child care
benefits; offer child care learning opportunities; and add a link in City Net for child
care information. $$-$$$
Partner with child care centers utilizing their facilities for City outreach and education
activities. $
Monitor and advocate for early childhood care legislation and funding at the federal
and state level; and, in particular with regard to easing unnecessary/overly restrictive
State rules and regulations and licensing requirements. $$
Expand duties of an existing board or commission to include early childhood care and
education. $
Look for a community partner(s), such as the ECCLC, to take the lead role for early
childhood care and education in our community; provide child care information to the
City, employers, employer organizations, and employees; conduct periodic survey and
analysis of families and demographic data to determine anticipated child care needs;
and, monitor and advise the City on state and federal legislation. Consider City
support and partnership opportunities, where appropriate, for instance underwriting
events and studies. $-$$
Collaborate with public and private organizations in the funding and potential
construction of one to two new child care center facilities in “south Fort Collins” and
in the Mason Corridor, primarily serving low income families. $-$$$
Add an indicator to the City Plan Monitoring program regarding early childhood care
and education. $
Consider child care in the City’s disaster relief planning. $$
Long term funding, such as a special sales tax (consider combining early childhood
care and education, human services, and affordable housing). $$$
12 SUSTAINABLE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT: EARLY CHILDHOOD CARE AND EDUCATION
4. Explore actions that build in early childhood care and education in the City’s economic
policies and actions, such as:
Imbed economic information about early childhood care and education in business and
economic development marketing materials. $
Find opportunities to educate/inform development community about early childhood
care and education, particularly low-income housing developers, and businesses
employing low income persons. $
Utilize City financial incentives (e.g. tax increment financing) to the provision of child
care facilities. $
Find opportunities and partnerships (Chamber of Commerce, CSU, SBA, etc.) to
incubate child care centers, such as business management and “back office” training
to child care providers; and, actions to foster the creation of a number of family child
care homes. $$
5. Explore actions that increase access to transit, such as:
Increase hours of operation and frequency so that parents can get their children to
child care and still be at work on time. $$$
Collaborate with public and private organizations in the funding and potential
construction of a new child care center facility in the Mason Corridor/BRT system,
adjacent to future stations and transit centers, particularly facilities serving low
income families. $-$$$
Federal and state transportation grant opportunities. $$-$$$
Attachment
HSP and CDBG Child Care Funding History
HSP & CDBG Childcare Funding History
Fundi
ng
Year
B.A.S.E.
Camp-
Sliding
Scale
#
Served
Boys &
Girls Club-
After-
School
#
Served
Childcare
Collabor
ative
#
Served
Family
Center-
Sliding
Scale
#
Served
Food
Bank-
Kids Café
#
Served
Respite
Care-
Sliding
Scale
#
Served
Springfie
ld Court-
Sliding
Scale
#
Served
Sunshine
School
#
Served
UDCC/Tea
ching Tree-
Scholarshi
ps
#
Served
Total to
Childcare
Total HSP
& CDBG
Funds
Available
HSP & CDBG Childcare Funding History
Fundi
ng
Year
B.A.S.E.
Camp-
Sliding
Scale
#
Served
Boys &
Girls Club-
After-
School
#
Served
Childcare
Collabor
ative
#
Served
Family
Center-
Sliding
Scale
#
Served
Food
Bank-
Kids Café
#
Served
Respite
Care-
Sliding
Scale
#
Served
Springfie
ld Court-
Sliding
Scale
#
Served
Sunshine
School
#
Served
UDCC/Tea
ching Tree-
Scholarshi
ps
#
Served
Total to
Childcare
Total HSP
& CDBG
Funds
Available
1
1
Early Childhood Care and Education
City Council Work Session
October 25, 2011
2
GENERAL DIRECTION SOUGHT AND
SPECIFIC QUESTIONS TO BE
ADDRESSED
• Does Council have any comments or questions about
what the City is currently doing in the area of
facilitating early childhood care and education in the
community?
• Compared to what the City is currently doing, does the
Council want to consider maintaining, refocusing
and/or expand the City’s efforts in facilitating early
childhood care and education services in the
community?
• If Council wishes to modify the City’s current efforts,
what additional strategies should be added to the
current program?
ATTACHMENT 2
2
3
Research –– Early Childhood Care and
Education
– Commonly defined as birth through eight years; a critical
time in human development.
– Quality early childhood care and education results in:
• children succeed in school
• become better citizens
• earn more
• pay more taxes
• more likely to be employed
– Local governments across the nation playing roles in
facilitating accessible, affordable and quality care and
education.
4
Background
– “Triple bottom line” benefits
• Social and financial needs of parents
• Educational and development needs of
children
• Improves the economy
• Other community development goals
3
5
Research –– A few key findings
• The biggest problem is
affordability…particularly, low income families
• There are important roles that local
governments can play; roles that blend well with
traditional services.
• City partnerships are important.
• The City organization could be a model.
6
What’’s What s Being Done in Fort Collins?
• State of Colorado – licensing; Child Care
Assistance Program funding (CCAP).
• Larimer County – Sanitation/Safety
inspections; administers CCAP.
• Early Childhood Council of Larimer County
(ECCLC) – leading agency. Connects families
to resources; raises standards; connects
providers to resources.
• Pathways Past Poverty – Child Care Access
Committee; raising employer awareness.
4
7
• Colorado State University’s Early Childhood
Center - train students; operates a child care
learning center
• Non-profit and for-profit providers; 33 child
care centers; 124 family care homes; 39
preschool facilities
• Poudre School District – Early Childhood
Program in 20 elementary schools; and,
prenatal, infant and toddler services
8
• City of Fort Collins
– Adopted policies – City Plan and
Consolidated Plan.
• Child care is a high priority community
development need
– Competitive Process – since 2002, has
allocated $1.4 million for child care services
– Land Use Code – child care centers are a
permitted use in 23 of 28 zoning districts
5
9
• As an employer, the City of Fort Collins
provides:
– 100 hours per year of child care when other
child care options fall through.
– Child care referral services.
– Sick leave to care for children.
– Leave for academic activities.
– Flexible Spending Accounts for Dependant
Care expenses.
– Flexible schedules and hours for child care.
10
Potential Strategies to Explore
• 32 potential actions:
– None are on any current work program.
– All require some level of staff resources .
– Some require future budget allocation .
– Some require further Council action; others
administrative.
– Some can be done relatively quickly (one-
year); others will take more time (2-5 years).
6
11
Resource Estimates of Potential Strategies
• Resource estimate:
– $ - requires in-house staff time
– $$ - requires more staff resources, time,
and dollars for research, study and public
process
– $$$ - requires most staff resources, time
and dollars
• may depend upon future budget
allocations, state or federal funding
• needs more public process
12
Highlights of Strategies
1. Explore adding new policies in existing plans
– City Plan ($)
• Siting
• City partnerships
– Economic Action Plan ($)
• Encouraging employers to support
child care
– Consolidated Plan ($)
• Priority for future funding
7
13
Highlights of Strategies
2. Explore actions that increase the supply and
affordability of child care
– Increase local funding for sliding scale fees
($$$)
– Remove barriers in codes ($)
– Prepare planning guide ($-$$)
– Offer process and development fee
incentives ($-$$)
– Siting standards ($-$$)
14
Highlights of Strategies
3. Explore actions wherein the City of Fort Collins
plays a leadership role in building community
support
– City as a model for other employers ($$-$$$)
– Partner in construction of 1-2 new facilities in
south Fort Collins ($-$$$)
– Monitor legislation at federal and state level
($$)
– Find a community partner who can play
leadership role (ECCLC?) ($-$$)
– Long term funding ($$$)
8
15
Highlights of Potential Strategies
4. Explore actions that builds childhood care and
education in the City’s economic policies and
programs.
• Incorporate info in marketing materials.
• Utilize existing City financial incentives.
• Find opportunities to partner with other
organizations to provide training on
opening new family care homes.
16
Highlights of Potential Strategies
5. Explore actions that increase access to transit
– Increase hours of operation ($$$)
• (earlier in morning; later at night; and
Sundays)
– Partner in construction of a new child care
center in the Mason Corridor ($-$$$)
9
17
GENERAL DIRECTION SOUGHT AND
SPECIFIC QUESTIONS TO BE
ADDRESSED
• Does Council have any comments or questions about
what the City is currently doing in the area of
facilitating early childhood care and education in the
community?
• Compared to what the City is currently doing, does the
Council want to consider maintaining, refocusing
and/or expand the City’s efforts in facilitating early
childhood care and education services in the
community?
• If Council wishes to modify the City’s current efforts,
what additional strategies should be added to the
current program? Does Council have any feedback
about what the City is currently doing to facilitate early
childhood care and education in the community?
18
Early Childhood Care and Education
City Council Work Session
October 25, 2011
% to
Childcare
Total #
Served by
Year
2011 $57,000 135 $18,644 475 $30,000 28 $21,000 1,225 $30,000 33 $60,000 60 $218,540 $689,455 31.70% 1,956
2010 $54,200 216 $17,458 913 $20,500 20 $21,667 1,620 $22,500 34 $51,500 49 $190,628 $567,959 33.56% 2,852
2009 $60,831 183 $18,309 1,245 $20,000 24 $27,959 1,725 $25,000 45 $54,367 68 $209,688 $641,529 32.69% 3,290
2008 $48,000 131 $11,520 1,118 $20,000 46 $22,167 1,504 $25,000 42 $54,000 53 $183,528 $598,643 30.66% 2,894
2007 $35,506 156 $14,719 1,092 $20,000 40 $20,000 23 $54,000 47 $145,536 $493,023 29.52% 1,358
2006 $33,815 164 $15,472 830 $20,000 46 $28,400 30 $60,500 51 $159,257 $496,964 32.05% 1,121
2005 $19,685 126 $7,750 62 $10,000 25 $15,000 28 $23,500 42 $76,176 $173,113 44.00% 283
2004 $19,685 134 $7,500 27 $17,500 35 $14,000 16 $25,500 49 $84,397 $200,850 42.02% 261
2003 $66,519 243 $15,000 32 $81,794 $210,860 38.79% 275
2002 $63,193 200 $63,393 $194,506 32.59% 200
$328,722 1,245 $65,931 3,751 $129,712 443 $98,250 180 $122,984 7,996 $160,000 292 $95,900 148 $14,000 16 $383,367 419 14,490
# Served = the number of unduplicated children served for that grant year 14,490
The numbers served reported for 2011 are anticipated numbers
The numbers served for 2010 reflect reporting as of 7/31/2011
Notes
1. Childcare Collaborative was made up of BASE Camp, United Day Care Center (now Teaching Tree), Respite Care and Sunshine School. Disbanded 2003/2004
2. Springfield Court - out of business 2007/2008
3. Sunshine School - out of business 2005/206
Total Number Served =
updated 6/14/2011
% to
Childcare
Total #
Served by
Year
2011 $57,000 135 $18,644 475 $30,000 28 $21,000 1,225 $30,000 33 $60,000 60 $218,540 $689,455 31.70% 1,956
2010 $54,200 216 $17,458 913 $20,500 20 $21,667 1,620 $22,500 34 $51,500 49 $190,628 $567,959 33.56% 2,852
2009 $60,831 183 $18,309 1,245 $20,000 24 $27,959 1,725 $25,000 45 $54,367 68 $209,688 $641,529 32.69% 3,290
2008 $48,000 131 $11,520 1,118 $20,000 46 $22,167 1,504 $25,000 42 $54,000 53 $183,528 $598,643 30.66% 2,894
2007 $35,506 156 $14,719 1,092 $20,000 40 $20,000 23 $54,000 47 $145,536 $493,023 29.52% 1,358
2006 $33,815 164 $15,472 830 $20,000 46 $28,400 30 $60,500 51 $159,257 $496,964 32.05% 1,121
2005 $19,685 126 $7,750 62 $10,000 25 $15,000 28 $23,500 42 $76,176 $173,113 44.00% 283
2004 $19,685 134 $7,500 27 $17,500 35 $14,000 16 $25,500 49 $84,397 $200,850 42.02% 261
2003 $66,519 243 $15,000 32 $81,794 $210,860 38.79% 275
2002 $63,193 200 $63,393 $194,506 32.59% 200
$328,722 1,245 $65,931 3,751 $129,712 443 $98,250 180 $122,984 7,996 $160,000 292 $95,900 148 $14,000 16 $383,367 419 14,490
# Served = the number of unduplicated children served for that grant year 14,490
The numbers served reported for 2011 are anticipated numbers
The numbers served for 2010 reflect reporting as of 7/31/2011
Notes
1. Childcare Collaborative was made up of BASE Camp, United Day Care Center (now Teaching Tree), Respite Care and Sunshine School. Disbanded 2003/2004
2. Springfield Court - out of business 2007/2008
3. Sunshine School - out of business 2005/206
Total Number Served =
updated 6/14/2011
This could include a review of building codes
and regulations pertaining to renovation of
existing structures.
X
AIS Attachment 5
Page 20 of 22
generating debris, etc.
Life-Safety and Flood
Damage Reduction
Criteria
Blockages and Damming
(Proposed fences, walls, rows of
trees, etc. Existing unmapped
risk upstream of bridges,
railroad crossings, etc.)
1 4-5
Evaluation of Life-Safety, Damage Reduction,
and Neighboring Property Rights Protection Criteria
** Note – This does not include the technical criteria (depth and velocity) being evaluated
through additional quantitative analyses.
Scale: 0 (Not Considered) – 10 (Fully Considered)
Flood Damage Resistant
Materials
6 7-8
Structure Design
4-5 7-8
Freeboard
8
8
Flood Damage
Reduction Criteria
Analysis of Impact on
Other Properties.
2
Analysis required if
doing a LOMR.
8
Mitigation of Impact on
Other Properties
1
Mitigation only
required if working in
the floodway and
mitigation only related
to change in flood
elevation.
8
Public Notification
1
Minimal notification as
part of LOMR.
9-10
Neighboring Property Rights
Protection
Public Comment
3
Can comment through
P&Z for large projects.
9
AIS Attachment 4
Page 14 of 22
Flood Damage
Reduction
Criteria
Freeboard
8
8
Page 1 of 2