HomeMy WebLinkAboutCOUNCIL - AGENDA ITEM - 01/27/2015 - STATUS OF ADEQUATE PUBLIC FACILITIES ORDINANCEDATE:
STAFF:
January 27, 2015
Karen Cumbo, Director of PDT
Rick Richter, Director of Infrastructure Services
WORK SESSION ITEM
City Council
SUBJECT FOR DISCUSSION
Status of the Adequate Public Facilities Ordinance.
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
The purpose of this item is to discuss the status of Land Use Code (LUC) Section 3.7.3 - Adequate Public
Facilities Ordinance (APF) in order to review the APF requirements and identify the next steps in exploring
revisions to the ordinance.
GENERAL DIRECTION SOUGHT AND SPECIFIC QUESTIONS TO BE ANSWERED
Discussion of next steps.
BACKGROUND / DISCUSSION
In 1997, the City adopted Section 3.7.3 of the Land Use Code in order to establish an ongoing mechanism that
ensured that public facilities and services needed to support development are available concurrently with the
impacts of such development. Ordinances governing “concurrency” of public facilities such as transportation,
utilities, and others generally operate in conjunction with specific land use requirements related to development.
In Fort Collins, APF provisions are in addition to other requirements for infrastructure that are needed to serve a
particular development. For transportation, the adoption of the APF Ordinance was intended to strengthen an
already existing Street Oversizing Program (SOP) that was established in 1979. The SOP continues today and is
a capital expansion fee program that collects revenue from new developments specifically to mitigate
communitywide traffic impacts. The SOP collects revenues intended to be used for the design and construction
of arterial and collector streets citywide, and is in addition to obligations for local street improvements needed for
development. The system improvements necessary to build the Master Street Plan are intended to be funded by
a combination of funding sources including City of Fort Collins Capital Funding (to address existing deficiencies
and broader, system-wide improvements not directly related to development) and developer contributions (to
address new impacts as identified in Traffic Impact Studies). Developer contributions are addressed by collecting
Street Oversizing fees at the time of development and by requiring certain road improvements to be built by the
developer at their cost. The collection of Street Oversizing fees cannot be used to address existing deficiencies
that are not related to development.
There have been questions raised about the implications of the APF ever since it was adopted. Staff files include
memos and notes from 2000, 2003, 2007, 2013, and 2014. A memo was sent to Council in September 2014 that
recommends consideration of these issues:
Updating of the Street Oversizing Program to verify the basis for assessing the proportional cost of
transportation improvements (including new standards for sidewalks, landscaping, etc.);
Evaluation of how redevelopment and infill impacts on public facilities differ from “greenfield” development
and incorporate the differences into new requirements;
Evaluation and drafting of alternative compliance methods like demand management strategies or other
methods that would reduce the need for traditional infrastructure improvements;
January 27, 2015 Page 2
Identification of a funding/financing strategy for the construction of existing deficiencies and costly projects
such as the above-grade crossing at Vine and Lemay or Timberline and Lemay improvements. A strategy is
needed since a portion of these improvements were needed at the time the APF Ordinance was enacted;
however a current funding source has not been identified. Because the need for these long-standing projects
is not entirely tied to development impacts, financial responsibility cannot be assigned solely to development.
ATTACHMENTS
1. Memo re: Adequate Public Facilities, September 11, 2014 (PDF)
ATTACHMENT 1