HomeMy WebLinkAboutCOUNCIL - AGENDA ITEM - 12/02/2014 - RESOLUTION 2014-109 APPROVING AND ACCEPTING THE COAgenda Item 18
Item # 18 Page 1
AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY December 2, 2014
City Council
STAFF
Karen Cumbo, Director of PDT
Mark Jackson, PDT Deputy Director
Laurie Kadrich, Community Development & Neighborhood Services Dir
SUBJECT
Resolution 2014-109 Approving and Accepting the Colorado State University On-Campus Stadium Mitigation
Report and Expressing the Policy of the City with Respect to Necessary Methods of Mitigation of Impacts
Generated by an On-Campus Stadium.
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
The purpose of this item is to provide a report on the impacts of a proposed on-campus stadium, and to
establish a framework for an intergovernmental agreement with Colorado State University (CSU) to mitigate
the impacts through operational planning and management, implementation of infrastructure improvements,
and establishment of neighborhood mitigation advisory groups and funding. If CSU elects to build an on-
campus stadium, staff recommends the City negotiate a detailed intergovernmental agreement to address the
impacts, including the funding of infrastructure improvements, operational needs, and neighborhood mitigation.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends adoption of Resolution.
BACKGROUND / DISCUSSION
When CSU President Dr. Tony Frank first spoke with City Council regarding the proposal for an on-campus
stadium, he committed to discussing an intergovernmental agreement or memorandum of understanding to
address off-campus impacts of a new stadium, although he acknowledged that CSU would not be interested in
funding City projects that were not related to a new stadium or which addressed existing issues. In August
2012, the City provided CSU with a memo outlining some concerns about assumptions and cost estimates for
transportation and utility improvements, and identifying several gaps in the information provided by the stadium
consultants in the conceptual plan. Since that time, CSU has completed a schematic design for an on-campus
stadium, and provided critical data to assess community impacts.
In February, 2014, City staff provided a memo and a timeline to Council on the plan to provide it with pertinent
information on the stadium impacts. Substantive work has since occurred with the concurrent timing of several
projects:
CSU convened a Community Design and Development Committee (CDDAC)
CSU began work on its Master Plan
The City began work on the West Central Area Plan (WCAP) which focuses on the neighborhoods just
south and west of the CSU Main Campus
Planning for transportation elements in the Prospect Corridor was added to the WCAP
CSU completed its Parking and Transportation Plan
Stadium consultants worked on Design/Development plans, provided a traffic impact study, and noise and
lighting studies
Agenda Item 18
Item # 18 Page 2
CSU and the City drafted new Bicycle Master Plans
City Council visited other communities with on-campus stadiums.
City staff analyzed the data and reports from all of these projects, many of which included significant
neighborhood engagement in conjunction with CSU. The CSU On-Campus Stadium Mitigation Report
(Exhibit A to the Resolution) is intended to serve as the basis of a mitigation plan adopted by an
intergovernmental agreement with CSU. It includes recommendations for transportation and utilities
infrastructure improvements, traffic operations planning elements, and environmental components. It also
includes a recommendation for a Neighborhood Mitigation fund. Operational components such as game-day
parking enforcement and traffic management are as important as infrastructure improvements, and are also
discussed in the report. Thoughtful operational planning can minimize the need for wide-scale infrastructure
improvements. More detailed operational planning needs to occur in collaboration with CSU, and this joint
planning should be a component of the intergovernmental agreement. It should be noted that this analysis
focused primarily on football game day impacts. These large events provide some opportunity for operational
strategies, such as the closure of streets, which may not be feasible for smaller events. Although information
is not yet available about the use of an on-campus stadium for other types of events, it is likely that smaller,
more frequent events could also have a significant impact on transportation and neighborhoods. In addition, if
a Hughes stadium alternative is selected, a similar approach to mitigating impacts through an
intergovernmental agreement should be considered.
SUMMARY OF MAJOR REPORT ELEMENTS
Transportation
Operational Planning
Given the tremendous expense and feasibility challenges of infrastructure construction, it is prudent to address
as many needs as possible through operational enhancements (such as additional transit service), and multi-
modal traffic management. This will require a comprehensive plan that includes outreach, education, detailed
parking information, transportation demand management, and game-day/event operational plans for all modes.
Infrastructure
The overall cost range of needed transportation infrastructure improvement is $13 - $22 million. About one
third of this cost is accounted for by two grade-separated pedestrian and bike crossings, and one third is in
intersection improvements at six locations. The remaining costs mitigate impacts through a number of smaller
projects.
Item Description Item #
on map
Est. Conceptual
Level Cost
1. Lane Improvements at five (5) intersections
a) Shields and Elizabeth Still under review # 1 $ 0.5 -1.0 million
b) Prospect and Shields WB right turn lane # 4 $ 0.5 -1.0 million
c) Prospect and Whitcomb Improve NB / SB left turn # 6 $ 0.5 -1.0 million
d) Prospect and Centre NB / SB double lefts # 8 $ 0.5 -1.0 million
e) College and Lake Lengthen NB left # 11 ~ $300,000
Subtotal: $ 2.0 - 4.5 million
2. Grade Separated Pedestrian and Bike Crossings at two (2) locations
a) Shields and Elizabeth # 2 $ 2.0 - 4.0 million
b) Prospect and Centre This includes connectivity to
north and south (sidewalks)
# 7 $ 2.0 - 4.0 million
Subtotal: $ 4.0 - 8.0 million
3. At-Grade Enhanced Pedestrian and Bike Crossings at four (4) locations
a) Shields and Pitkin Pedestrian hybrid HAWK signal # 3 ~ $ 75,000
b) Prospect at Mason Trail Enlarge crossing area # 9 ~ $ 50,000
Agenda Item 18
Item # 18 Page 3
c) Laurel at Washington Add median and Rectangular
Rapid Flashing Beacon (RRFB)
# 12 ~ $ 100,000
d) Laurel at Sherwood Add median and center RRFB # 13 ~ $100,000
Subtotal: ~ $ 400,000
4. Intersection review at Prospect and College. Likely EB and WB
double lefts and addition of bike and pedestrian accommodations
(review potential for right turn islands and bike connectivity to east).
# 10 $ 3.0 - 4.0 million
5. Prospect corridor improvement review per recommendations from
West Central Area Plan (WCAP). For stadium impact, the most
prominent needed improvement is the wide multi-use path on north
side.
# 5 $ 2.0 - 3.0 million
6. Lake Street bike / pedestrian improvements per recommendations
from West Central Area Plan (WCAP). The largest needed item here
is the protected bike lane.
# 14 ~ $ 1.0 million
7. Sidewalk improvements as listed in Campus Stadium Traffic
Impact Study (TIS page 74). This includes sidewalks on Whitcomb
that connect between Lake and Prospect Road.
-- Unknown
8. Intersection control review at Lake and Centre # 15 $ 0.5 - 1.0 million
9. Traffic Responsive Signal System. This is a system that will detect
current vehicular traffic patterns and adjust signal timing ‘on the fly’ as
conditions change. This system will especially benefit non-capacity
events that don’t utilize police controlled intersections and operations
for future growth of campus traffic. Much of the ability to do this is
already in place at the City’s Traffic Management Center, but
additional detection at the 15 signalized intersections immediately
adjacent to the University will need to be installed and the
management of the system implemented.
-- ~ $ 150,000
Note: Item # on map refers to the map included as part of Exhibit A to the Resolution.
Transit
A review of CSU’s Traffic Impact Analysis coupled with a conceptual feasibility assessment resulted in the
recommended enhanced transit service needed to transport an estimated 7,500 stadium attendees onto the
CSU main campus. Conceptual costs assume six game-day events. Transfort identified five sub-areas to
target for enhanced and new special event transit service two hours prior to kick-off and two hours after the
end of a game.
1. Gillette Drive/Centre Avenue extending from the Veterinary Teaching Hospital north to Prospect Road.
This corridor will serve the parking located near the CSU tennis courts, the Natural Resources Research
Center (NRRC), and The Grove apartment complex. Expense per event: $7,040.
2. Mason Corridor served by the MAX. This corridor provides connections to CSU from multiple parking
lots/structures and residential units from the South Transit Center to the Downtown Transit Center.
Expense per event: $6,400.
3. East Prospect extending from I-25 and Prospect west to Whitcomb. This corridor will serve parking
located at the Colorado Welcome Center and the CDOT Rest Stop as well as residential locations along
East Prospect. Expense per event: $2,560.
4. West Elizabeth and West Prospect. These two corridors will serve high density student housing and
potential park-and-ride locations. Expense per event: $4,480.
5. On campus along the Around the Horn alignment. This area serves on campus parking, residential and
the CSU Transit Center. Expense per event: $1,280.
Agenda Item 18
Item # 18 Page 4
The special event transit service recommended above is designed to accommodate 7,500 stadium attendees
both before and after an on-campus event. The expense for the additional service recommended would
cost $21,760 per event, or $130,560 for six events. These expenses are represented in 2014 dollars and
should be increased annually by the local CPI for year of implementation. Any event attracting several
thousand people will have a profound impact on adjacent transit routes, particularly the MAX service, and will
require enhanced transit service to accommodate. The City recommends that coordination occur between
CSU and the City for any event at an on-campus stadium to identify if it requires special event transit service
and/or other traffic mitigation.
Parking
A detailed on-campus parking program will be needed for the stadium. This is the University’s responsibility to
develop, implement, and manage. Since many lots are small and scattered throughout the campus, a major
concern for both City Traffic and Police Services is that attendees not drive around looking for multiple places
for parking. Clear wayfinding, assigned lot designations for ticket holders, and increased use of remote lots
with shuttle services are strongly recommended.
The University acknowledges that as many as 3,000 off campus parking spaces will be needed for a major
event. Many of those spaces will be at the south campus, tennis courts, or NRRC. It is the University’s
responsibility to secure the parking (whether on the main campus, South Campus, or elsewhere) and
implement a shuttle system between parking and the stadium.
The stadium Traffic Impact Analysis also assumes there will be up to 8,000 attendees at a sold out event that
will walk or bike from off-campus to the event. This will require thousands of bike parking stalls or similar
facilities close to the stadium.
Parking in Neighborhoods
Residents of neighborhoods near the CSU campus are concerned about game-day parking on residential
streets. The City has implemented a Residential Parking Permit Program (RP3) to help address this issue.
Currently, there are three neighborhoods in the program (Spring Court, Sheely, and Mantz). By the time the
stadium is built, it is likely that several additional neighborhoods will be added. The RP3 requires a permit to
park in a residential permit zone. Only residents of the zone are allowed to obtain permits.
Normal enforcement of a residential permit zone involves issuing citations to vehicles that do not have a
permit. The City feels this approach will not be effective on game day. In order to preserve the residential
character of neighborhoods on game day, a more proactive preventative approach is needed. “Prevention” will
consist of posting signs in neighborhoods stating, “Vehicles without proper permit will be towed.” (This
approach has been very effective in residential areas around the Broncos’ stadium in Denver.) Six
enforcement officers and a supervisor will be on duty on game-day for a four-hour period beginning two hours
before game time to coordinate towing of vehicles with private tow companies. The figures below reflect
Parking Services staff’s cost estimate for these services. Note: Residential parking management may be
needed for other non-football events as well.
Variable costs (enforcement officers, supervisor, and vehicles): $3,710 per event
One-time costs (400 reusable specialty signs): $24,000
Alternative Approach to Neighborhood Parking Enforcement
An alternative but less effective approach would be to write citations for vehicles that park in the permit
neighborhoods without a permit, but not tow them. Large signs could be posted at the entrances to these
neighborhoods to alert game-day traffic to the possibility of receiving a citation. Under this scenario, the
personnel costs would remain the same, but the cost of signs would be significantly less. However, it should
be recognized that many game-day ticket holders may consider the cost of a citation to be a reasonable price
to pay for close-in parking (this applies in particular to the Sheely area.)
Agenda Item 18
Item # 18 Page 5
Variable costs of the alternative approach, per game-day: $2,480
One-time costs (25 reusable specialty signs, $150 each): $3,750
For potential off-campus parking in area neighborhoods, it is the University’s responsibility to develop,
implement, enforce and/or fund any needed expansion and broader use of the City’s Residential Parking
Permit Program (RP3) that is related to stadium use.
Police Services
Fort Collins Police Services has provided assistance to CSU for its football game day traffic and some other
public safety duties within the stadium. CSU currently reimburses Police Services about $70,000 per year
for actual overtime expense for officers working the games. There is no current formal agreement with CSU
that defines this management structure for mutual aid or requires the University to pay for police services for
game management. It has been a verbal agreement, and there have been no problems with this arrangement,
but staff recommends that this arrangement, which is cost neutral, be documented in the intergovernmental
agreement.
If the University moves forward with the on-campus stadium, staff recommends that football games and other
special events be permitted under the City’s special events process. A special events permit would be required
to modify the traffic pattern on city streets and would allow the City to better manage the issues associated
with large events. A special events permit application is reviewed by several City departments to make sure it
meets the requirements and that the impacts of the event are properly managed by the organizers. Whether
the event is an athletic event, music concert or political rally, the permit process would allow the City to require
the event organizers to properly plan for the event.
Utilities
Light and Power
CSU uses its own electric utility services, and can incorporate and accommodate additional loads and service
levels required by a new on-campus stadium. As a result, there are no impacts to City of Fort Collins’ Light and
Power utility to be mitigated.
Water Utilities
The proposed Multi-Purpose Stadium will have varying impacts on the City’s water, wastewater and
stormwater systems. The major effect will be on the wastewater system that will occur during large events
when 40,000 people are in attendance.
Conceptual preliminary costs of the sanitary sewer improvements in Whitcomb Street and stormwater quality
improvements are as follows:
Item and Description Est. Conceptual
Level Cost
1. Sanitary sewer in Whitcomb Street from Lake Street to
Wallenberg Drive.
2. Water quality pond at outfall of 42” storm sewer
3. Proprietary mechanical BMP on 36” storm sewer
$1.5 to 2.0 million
$75,000 to $100,000
$175,000 to $200,000
Neighborhood Impacts and Relations
The proposed location of an on-campus stadium will have a substantial impact to the surrounding residential
neighborhoods on game days and other events. Staff recommends the creation of a Stadium Area Advisory
Group and a Good Neighbor Fund to address and mitigate impacts to the neighborhoods.
Agenda Item 18
Item # 18 Page 6
Stadium Area Advisory Group /”Neighborhood Mitigation Fund”
Staff suggests that The University of Minnesota District Partnership be used as a model for developing a
Stadium Area Advisory Group and a Neighborhood Mitigation Fund. Staff further recommends that the
Stadium Area Advisory Group form a committee to administer a Good Neighbor Fund to enhance and protect
the neighborhoods impacted by the operation of a CSU on-campus stadium. The committee formed should
include someone from the Advisory Group, neighborhood organization representatives and at least one
business association representative. The fund committee is responsible on an annual basis for developing a
budget, soliciting proposals, reviewing applications and recommending expenditures from the Fund. Staff
suggests that project dollars or a ticket surcharge be used to establish a fund. Projects that might be funded
through such a program include: park and streetscape improvements, signage, neighborhood planning,
wayfinding and promotion of commercial districts and other content that promotes living in the neighborhood,
youth programs, etc.
Noise and Lighting Impacts
Areas of primary concern voiced by nearby residents were the spillover effects of stadium-related noise and
lighting. The CSU design team addressed these issues in their preliminary reports. City Staff provided the CSU
team with these recommended mitigation measures:
Noise
City staff analyzed the CSU design team’s reports and offered potential mitigation solutions for both football
games and concert events. Based upon CSU’s assumptions and noise contour map, City staff found that
anticipated decibel levels during the football game, south of Prospect Road, primarily in the High Density
Mixed-Use Neighborhood (H-M-N) zone and the Sheely neighborhood, exceed that which is allowed by
Section 20-21 of the City Code. The CSU study also indicates that amplified music concerts have the potential
for higher peak and average sound levels than sports events.
Recommended mitigation measures to address football game-related noise issues include:
Raising the wall at the south end of the stadium so that when combined with the scoreboard, there is a
more effective mass capable of lowering the off-site decibels impacting the Low Density Residential (R-L)
zone district to the south, and possibly including live plant material.
Perform sound measurement analysis at Hughes Stadium, and its environs to use real-time sound
measurements during actual football games at distances that approximate the distance from the south end
of the proposed on-campus stadium to the nearest residential property lines zoned R-L. Adjustments
could be made for stadium design and loudspeaker arrangement.
Recommended mitigation measures to address concert-related noise at the stadium include:
Limit the number of concerts per year.
Establish a time certain conclusion for concerts.
Consider agreeing to hold concerts only upon the granting of a special use permit (allowed by the
ordinance) or Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) from the City.
Preliminary coordination with concert sound company to discuss speaker orientation and sound monitoring
techniques
Lighting Impacts
City staff also reviewed the CSU design team’s lighting analysis and noted several areas of concern related to
spillover illumination to nearby residential areas and glare to motorists.
Recommended mitigation measures to address spillover illumination at the stadium include:
Agenda Item 18
Item # 18 Page 7
Provide a point by point illumination plan (photometric diagram) showing the foot-candles at regular
intervals as a result of all lighting sources, not just the sports lighting. Such a plan would include all other
exterior lighting, interior lighting that emits illumination through large windows and any auxiliary lighting that
may be associated with music concerts. Analyzing a photometric diagram would reveal various hot-spots
that would need to be addressed by reducing lighting or by mitigation to block line-of-sight.
Reduce the light impact on the H-M-N zone to the south of the Stadium or provide massing to block the
line-of-sight of the light sources. Such massing could potentially be provided along the south end of the
stadium in the area of the bridge/concourse to supplement the scoreboard. Such massing would also
have the benefit of blocking decibels from the P.A. system or amplified music as noted in the analysis of
the Noise Study.
SUMMARY
If CSU elects to build a football stadium on its main campus, staff recommends that the City negotiate a
detailed intergovernmental agreement to address these impacts of an on-campus stadium:
Funding of specific infrastructure improvements
Funding of all stadium-related operational planning, including outreach, education, communication, etc.
Funding of necessary operational costs on event days, including parking enforcement, transit and police
services
Consideration of environmental impacts during design, construction and operation
Consideration of the use of the stadium for non-football events, with requirements for operational
management plans to address all impacts
Establishment of a Neighborhood Advisory Group and a Neighborhood Mitigation Fund.
FINANCIAL / ECONOMIC IMPACTS
See Background/Discussion information.
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS
Staff recommends several “Best Practice” mitigation strategies that CSU should consider as part of the Design
and Construction processes:
Design Phase
CSU should conduct an air quality impact analysis, evaluate greenhouse gas emissions and impacts, and
develop restorative, regenerative, and sustainable practices that support a “green” built environment, including
ozone formation in the ozone non-attainment area, Carbon Monoxide (CO) hot spots, and diesel particulate
matter emissions, and use the results to inform street design, optimal traffic flow patterns and infrastructure
design for alternative modes of transportation. It should maximize deconstruction practices, reuse and recycle
building materials, and select sustainable materials. CSU should minimize and recycle construction waste and
incorporate energy efficiency into any of the scenarios. Examples could include incorporating solar and wind
energy production into site and building design, developing innovative methods for utilizing thermal storage
capacity and designing enclosed spaces to the highest energy efficiency standards. CSU should maximize
use of low impact development principles, design for low water use and treatment and use of gray water and
overall ensure building operation and maintenance is optimized for sustainability.
Construction Phase
During construction, CSU should prohibit unnecessary vehicle idling, equip vehicles with auxiliary power units,
minimize construction equipment idling for warm up and cool down, and use ultra-low sulfur diesel or bio-diesel
fuels. These actions will minimize air pollutants from construction vehicles. To reduce air emissions from any
asphalt paving, CSU should discontinue paving operations on high ozone days, conduct paving operations at
night, use alternative materials such as gravel, concrete, warm mix asphalt and use pervious pavement or
Agenda Item 18
Item # 18 Page 8
pavers. Spray materials should be avoided and low or no Volatile Organic Compound (VOC) materials should
be utilized. A dust control plan incorporating best management practices should be utilized.
Climate Action and Adaptation Impacts
CSU should estimate emission from new construction and determine strategies to offset these emissions. CSU
should determine the impact to increased GHG emission to GHG emission reduction goals established by the
City and determine strategies to offset. CSU should determine impact to the City’s Climate Action Plan and
Road to Zero Waste Plan, analyze the carbon footprint for the estimated life of a new stadium and determine
strategies to offset emissions.
BOARD / COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION
The report and its recommendations have not been presented to any boards or commissions.
PUBLIC OUTREACH
City and CSU staff organized several public engagement events as part of the West Central Area Plan effort.
These included focused conversations on neighborhood issues as well as the CSU Master Plan and the
proposed on-campus stadium. While they provided considerable input to all three efforts (WCAP, CSU Master
Plan, Stadium Mitigation Report), the actual report was not the subject of public outreach.
ATTACHMENTS
1. Powerpoint (PPTX)
1
CSU On Campus Stadium Impacts
Mitigation Report
Karen Cumbo, PDT Director
Mark Jackson, PDT Deputy Director
Laurie Kadrich, CDNS Director
Analysis and Recommendations
2
Purpose:
• Analysis of impacts
• Cost estimations
• Intended to serve as a guide for IGA with CSU
• Based upon:
– Collaboration with CSU staff and project teams
– Analysis of CSU design and traffic studies
– Input from CSU’s public process, CDDAC,
Master Plans, and Council work sessions
3
Key Impacts:
• Transportation and Transit Operations
• Transportation and Utilities Infrastructure
• City Services
(Police, Parking and Code Enforcement)
• Community Character
– Neighborhood Impacts & Relations
– Environmental Impacts
4
Area Map:
N
5
Transportation:
Moving People In & Out of Events
• Significant automobile traffic for events, but:
– Greater percent of pedestrian and bicycle
– Transit service opportunities
– Multi-modal traffic management strategies
• Cannot eliminate congestion, but can mitigate
6
Parking Issues and Strategies:
• CSU event parking not centralized.
• 3,000+ spaces located off the main campus
– Requires strong way-finding
– Recommend assigned designated lots for
ticket holders
– Remote lots increase pedestrian traffic and
shuttle transit service
7
Parking Issues In Neighborhoods:
• Great concern about event-day parking
• Residential Parking Permit Program (RP3)
– Proactive parking enforcement
– Additional enforcement needed for events
– Estimated cost per event $2,500 - $3,700
8
Transit:
• Estimated 7,500 transit riders game day
• Recommended additional event-related service:
– Gillette Drive/Centre Avenue (remote lots)
– Mason Corridor/MAX
– East Prospect from I-25
– W. Elizabeth & W. Prospect
– On campus shuttle “Around the Horn”
• Estimated cost per event: $21,760
9
Transit:
10
Transportation Infrastructure:
• Even with traffic management, still “pinch point”
areas affecting event traffic
• Direct relation to stadium events
• Based upon:
– CSU Stadium Traffic Impact Study
– CSU Parking & Transportation Plan
– CSU Bicycle Master Plan
– West Central Area Plan
11
Transportation Infrastructure:
Recommendations:
• Intersection improvements
• Grade separated pedestrian and bike crossings
• Enhanced at-grade pedestrian and bike crossings
Total transportation infrastructure estimated costs:
• $13.0 - $22 million
12
Transportation Infrastructure:
13
Utilities Infrastructure:
• Light & Power
• Water Utilities
– Water
– Stormwater
– Waste water
• Governed by Service Allocation Agreement
14
Utilities Infrastructure:
• Total Utilities infrastructure improvements:
– $1.75 - $2.3 million
– Fire protection needs
– Whitcomb Street sanitary sewer
– Stormwater infrastructure
15
Community & Neighborhood Character
• Integrate consideration of those things that make
Fort Collins a special place:
– View sheds
– Neighborhood vitality and character
– Historic preservation
– Noise and lighting impacts
– Environmental sustainability
16
Neighborhood Areas:
17
Community & Neighborhood Character
Neighborhood Impacts & Relations
• Stadium Advisory Group
– Collaboration between CSU, City and
Neighborhoods
• “Good Neighbor Fund”
– Neighborhood Mitigation fund
18
Community & Neighborhood Character
Noise & Lighting Impacts
• Noise levels during football games and concerts
may exceed City Code levels
• Reduce spillover lighting in neighborhoods
19
Community & Neighborhood Character
Environmental Impacts
• Recommended Best Practices during Design,
Construction, and Operational phases:
– Air quality analysis and mitigation practices
– Minimize construction waste and recycling
– Deconstruction principles
– Energy efficient design and operations
– Reduce vehicle idling
– Low or no VOC materials
20
Summary:
If CSU elects to build an on-campus stadium, the
City should enter into an IGA to address
impacts:
• Funding:
– infrastructure improvements
– all stadium-related operational planning
– operational costs on event days, including
parking enforcement, transit and police
services
21
Summary:
If CSU elects to build an on-campus stadium, the
City should enter into an IGA to address
impacts:
• Consideration of:
– environmental impacts
– use of the stadium for non-football events
– operational management plans
– Neighborhood Advisory Group and a
Neighborhood Mitigation Fund
- 1 -
RESOLUTION 2014-109
OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FORT COLLINS
APPROVING AND ACCEPTING THE COLORADO STATE UNIVERSITY
ON-CAMPUS STADIUM MITIGATION REPORT AND EXPRESSING THE POLICY
OF THE CITY WITH RESPECT TO NECESSARY METHODS OF MITIGATION
OF IMPACTS GENERATED BY AN ON-CAMPUS STADIUM
WHEREAS, Colorado State University (“CSU”) has given serious consideration to the
construction and operation of a new football stadium located on the main campus of CSU; and
WHEREAS, the construction of such on-campus stadium would present impacts to the
City and to the neighborhoods adjacent to the proposed stadium; and
WHEREAS, it is important that CSU consider and integrate neighborhood and
community character into the design and construction of an on-campus stadium, including items
such as preservation of viewsheds, noise and lighting impacts, historic preservation,
environmental sensitivity, and retaining neighborhood vitality and character; and
WHEREAS, after analysis of available data, as well as visitation by Councilmembers to
other communities with on-campus stadiums, the City has generated the CSU On-Campus
Stadium Mitigation Report which addresses both impacts and mitigation methods and which
report the City Council has found acceptable; and
WHEREAS, the City has also engaged in numerous discussions with CSU regarding the
impacts of an on-campus stadium and the City has determined that the mitigation of these
impacts must be accomplished through an intergovernmental agreement to address operational
and planning management, implementation of infrastructure improvements and funding therefor,
establishment of neighborhood mitigation advisory groups and methods to alleviate negative
impacts to the region adjacent to the stadium; and
WHEREAS, the City Council has determined that, if a stadium is to be constructed on the
CSU campus, the City and CSU should enter into an intergovernmental agreement to address
operational planning, infrastructure, improvements, transit operations, parking issues, overflow
parking in adjacent neighborhoods, police services, utilities, noise and lighting impacts, and
CSU/neighborhood relations issues in order to protect the health, safety and welfare of the City
and its citizens; and
WHEREAS, CSU President Tony Frank has publically expressed willingness to consider
an intergovernmental agreement with the City.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
FORT COLLINS as follows:
Section 1. That the CSU On-Campus Stadium Mitigation Report, attached hereto as
Exhibit “A” and incorporated herein by reference, is hereby approved and accepted.
- 2 -
Section 2. That the policy of the City is that if an on-campus stadium is constructed
by CSU, there must be an intergovernmental agreement negotiated between the City and CSU to
address the impacts of an on-campus stadium which agreement shall include, without limitation,
the commitment by CSU to participate equitably in the funding of specific infrastructure
improvements, the funding of all stadium-related operational planning, including outreach,
education and communication, the funding of necessary operational costs on event days,
including parking enforcement, transit and police services, the consideration of environmental
impacts during design, construction and operation, the consideration of the use of the stadium for
non-football events, with requirements for operational and management plans to address all
impacts related to non-football events, and the establishment of a neighborhood advisory group
and a neighborhood mitigation fund to protect the neighborhoods adjacent to the stadium.
Passed and adopted at a regular meeting of the Council of the City of Fort Collins this
2nd day of December, A.D. 2014.
_________________________________
Mayor
ATTEST:
_____________________________
City Clerk
Page 1 of 13
Colorado State University
Multi-Purpose, On-Campus Stadium
Mitigation Needs and Recommendations
Colorado State University’s proposed on-campus multi-purpose stadium will have a substantial impact
on local infrastructure, event-day traffic congestion, municipal services, and area residents. Any
gathering of 40,000 people (or even a gathering of 10,000 people) influences not just the immediate
area, but also has impacts that can be felt miles away.
Colorado State University staff and their consultant teams worked with City of Fort Collins staff to
analyze the potential impacts of an on-campus stadium. Impacts to Transportation Operations and
Infrastructure, Utilities Infrastructure, Municipal Services such as Police and Parking Enforcement,
Neighborhood Impacts and Relations including Noise and Lighting, and Environmental concerns were
identified, then recommended mitigation steps developed. Where possible, order of magnitude cost
estimates for mitigation strategies were included. This memo recommends off-campus mitigation needs
should the stadium project move forward.
This report is intended to inform discussions between the City of Fort Collins and Colorado State
University in the development of an Inter-Governmental Agreement (IGA) that will mitigate on-campus
stadium impacts to the community.
Operational Strategies: Transportation, Parking, Transit, and Police Services
Transportation in and out of the current Hughes Stadium is primarily by automobile, with little travel by
bus, bicycle or pedestrian modes. As a result, Hughes Stadium is designed to accommodate this
vehicular movement with ample surface parking. Moving people before and after football games is a
relatively straightforward, although time-consuming exercise. Moving the stadium on-campus opens up
opportunities for a more diverse, multi-modal approach to moving people before and after an event.
Parking is more spread out on the CSU main campus and satellite campus sites, posing unique
challenges in wayfinding and management, but also opening up opportunities for remote parking and
access via shuttle transit services. Finally, an on-campus stadium likely means a much greater
percentage of students and nearby residents accessing the stadium as pedestrians or as bicyclists.
City of Fort Collins staff worked closely with CSU’s Staff and transportation consultant team to examine
the assumptions and strategies incorporated into their transportation impact analysis and
recommendations. The two teams agreed on modal split assumptions, verified the estimates of
available parking, and discussed incorporating transit into the event management strategies. The result
of the collaborative effort identifies ways to accommodate events through planning, encouragement of
mode-shift, operations, and infrastructure improvements.
It is important to note that implementation of all of the items identified below will not completely
eliminate the impact of the stadium on area roadways, travel patterns, congestion, delay and parking.
Their implementation will reasonably mitigate the largest and most directly tangible elements of impact,
strengthen mobility, and support the safety of multi-modal users.
Page 2 of 13
Developing an Operational Plan
Given the tremendous expense and feasibility challenges of infrastructure construction, it is prudent to
address as many needs as possible through operational enhancements (such as additional transit
service), and multi-modal traffic management. This will require a comprehensive plan that includes
outreach, education, detailed parking information, transportation demand management, and game day
operational plans for all modes.
The full development of a detailed travel demand management and game day operational plan is the
responsibility of the University, but in collaboration with the City of Fort Collins. The timeline for this
would occur in future months (or even years) and needs to involve CSU staff, Police Services, and City
transit, traffic operations and parking services. In the meantime, enough work has been done to
develop a general approach for accommodating game day transportation at the new stadium.
Parking
A detailed on-campus parking management program will be needed for the stadium events. This is the
University’s responsibility to develop, implement, and manage. Since many lots are small and scattered
throughout the campus, a major concern for both City Traffic and Police Services is that attendees not
drive around looking multiple places for parking. Clear wayfinding and assigned lot designations for
ticket holders are strongly recommended.
The University acknowledges that as many as 3,000 off campus parking spaces will be needed for a
major event. Many of those spaces will be at the south campus, tennis courts, or Natural Resources
Research Center (NRRC). It is the University’s responsibility to secure the parking (whether on the main
campus, South Campus, or elsewhere) and implement a shuttle system between parking and the
stadium.
The stadium traffic impact analysis also assumes that there will be up to 8,000 attendees at a sold out
event that will walk or bike from off-campus to the event. This will require thousands of bike parking
stalls or similar facilities close to the stadium.
For potential off-campus parking in area neighborhoods, it is the University’s responsibility to develop,
implement, enforce and/or fund any needed expansion and broader use of the City’s Residential Parking
Permit Program (RP3) that is related to stadium use.
Parking in Neighborhoods
Residents of neighborhoods near the CSU campus are concerned about game-day parking on residential
streets. The City has implemented a Residential Parking Permit Program (RP3) to help address this issue.
Currently, there are three neighborhoods in the program (Spring Court, Sheely, and Mantz.) By the time
the stadium is built, it is likely that several additional neighborhoods will be added. The RP3 requires a
permit to park in a residential permit zone. Only residents of the zone are allowed to obtain permits.
Normal enforcement of a residential permit zone involves issuing citations to vehicles that do not have a
permit. The City feels this approach will not be effective on game day. In order to preserve the
residential character of neighborhoods on game day, a more proactive preventative approach is needed.
“Prevention” will consist of posting signs in neighborhoods stating, “Vehicles without proper permit will
be towed.” (This approach has been very effective in residential areas around the Broncos’ stadium in
Denver.) Six enforcement officers and a supervisor will be on duty on game-day for a four-hour period
Page 3 of 13
beginning two hours before game time to coordinate towing of vehicles with private tow companies.
The figures below reflect Parking Services staff’s cost estimate for these services. Note: Residential
parking management may be needed for other non-football events as well.
Variable costs (these costs will be incurred on each game day.)
Six enforcement officers and one supervisor, four hours overtime: $1,200
Officer-vehicle expense (mileage): $50
Tow companies will be paid by vehicle owners when they retrieve their vehicles
400 candlestick signs, $3.75 daily rental rate for each: $1,500
Labor @ $60/hr, 4 people to set up signs, X 2 hours: $480
Labor @ $60/hr, 4 people to takedown signs X 2 hours: $480
Total variable costs: $3,710 per event
One-time costs
Fabricate 400 specialty signs, $60 each: $24,000
Note: once these signs are made, they can be used over and over again.
Total one-time costs: $24,000
Alternative approach to neighborhood parking enforcement
An alternative, but less effective approach would be to write citations for vehicles that park in the
permit neighborhoods without a permit, but not tow them. Large signs could be posted at the
entrances to these neighborhoods to alert game-day traffic to the possibility of receiving a citation.
Under this scenario, the personnel costs would remain the same, but the cost of signs would be
significantly less. However, it should be recognized that many game-day ticket holders may consider the
cost of a citation to be a reasonable price to pay for close-in parking (this applies in particular to the
Sheely area.)
Variable costs of the alternative approach, per game-day
Six enforcement officers and one supervisor, four hours overtime: $1,200
Officer-vehicle expense (mileage): $50
25 large signs with barricades, $30 daily rental rate each: $750
Labor @ $60/hr, 2 people to set up signs, X 2 hours: $240
Labor @ $60/hr, 2 people to take down signs, X 2 hours: $240
Total variable costs: $2,480
One-time costs
Fabricate 25 specialty signs, $150 each: $3,750
Note: once these signs are made, they can be used over and over again.
Total one-time costs: $3,750
Transit Enhancements
A review of CSU’s traffic impact analysis coupled with a conceptual feasibility assessment resulted in the
recommended enhanced transit service needed to transport an estimated 7,500 stadium attendees
onto the CSU main campus. Conceptual costs assume six game day events. Transfort identified five sub-
areas to target for enhanced and new special event transit service two hours prior to kick-off and two
hours after the end of game (See Attachment 1):
Page 4 of 13
1. Gillette Drive/Centre Avenue extending from the Veterinary Teaching Hospital north to
Prospect Road. This corridor will serve the parking located near the CSU tennis courts, the
NRRC, and the Grove apartment complex.
a. Two minute service headways
b. 11 additional buses
c. Capacity for 3,600 passengers using 11 buses over two hour span
d. Expense for six events: $42,240 ($7,040 per event)
e. Total service hours: Eight
2. Mason Corridor served by the MAX. This corridor provides connections to CSU from multiple
parking lots/structures and residential units from the South Transit Center to the Downtown
Transit Center.
a. Five minute service headways
b. 10 additional buses
c. Capacity for 3,840 passengers using 16 buses over two hour span
d. Expense for six events: $38,400 ($6,400 per event)
e. Total service hours: Eight
3. East Prospect extending from I-25 and Prospect west to Whitcomb. This corridor will serve
parking located at the Colorado Welcome Center and the CDOT Rest Area as well as residential
locations along East Prospect.
a. 15 minute service headways
b. Four additional buses
c. Capacity for 480 passengers using 4 buses over two hour span
d. Expense for six events: $15,360 ($2,560 per event)
e. Total service hours: Eight
4. West Elizabeth and West Prospect. These two corridors will serve high density student housing
and potential park-and-ride locations.
a. 10 minute service headways
b. Seven additional buses
c. Capacity for 1,440 passengers using 8 buses over two hour span
d. Expense for six events: $26,880 ($4,480 per event)
e. Total service hours: Eight
5. On campus along the Around the Horn alignment. This area serves on campus parking,
residential and the CSU transit Center.
a. 10 minute service headways
b. Two additional buses
c. Capacity for 480 passengers using 3 buses over two hour span
d. Expense for six events: $7,680 ($1,280 per event)
e. Total service hours: Eight
The special event transit service recommended above is designed to accommodate 7,500 stadium
attendees both before and after an on-campus event. The recommendation provides for additional
capacity knowing that each bus will not be at 100% capacity for every trip during the two hour span
before and after an event. The expense for the additional service recommended would cost $21,760
per event, or $130,560 for six events. These expenses are represented in 2014 dollars and should be
Page 5 of 13
increased annually by the local CPI for year of implementation. Any event attracting several thousand
people will have a profound impact on adjacent transit routes, particularly the MAX service, and will
require enhanced transit service to accommodate. The City recommends that coordination occur
between CSU and the City for any event at an on-campus stadium to identify if it requires special event
transit service and/or other traffic mitigation.
This recommendation does not address stadium access or parking and bus staging requirements
necessary for drop-off and pick-up of passengers. These accommodations would be necessary for any
special event transit service to an on-campus stadium. CSU project staff has acknowledged this need
and are incorporating it into their design and operational plans.
Police Services
For decades Fort Collins Police Services has provided assistance to Colorado State University for their
football game day traffic and some other public safety duties within the stadium. CSU currently
reimburses Police Services about $70,000 per year for the overtime expense for officers working the
games. Game day management is a joint effort that involves CSUPD, Larimer County Sheriff’s Office,
Loveland Police and Colorado State Patrol. In the past these agencies operated under an
intergovernmental agreement, but currently utilize a blanket mutual aid agreement that the Sheriff
publishes every year that gives all the enforcement agencies jurisdiction throughout the county. There is
no current formal agreement with Colorado State University that defines this management structure or
requires the University to pay for police services for game management. It has been a verbal agreement,
and there have been no problems with this arrangement.
If the University moves forward with the on-campus stadium, we recommend that football games and
other special events be permitted under the City’s special events process. A special events permit would
be required to modify the traffic pattern on city streets and would allow the city to better manage the
issues associated with large events. A special events permit application is reviewed by several city
departments to make sure it meets the requirements and that the impacts of the event are properly
managed by the organizers. Whether the event is an athletic event, music concert or political rally, the
permit process would allow the city to require the event organizers to properly plan for the event. This
process is currently used for CSU events such as the annual Homecoming Parade.
The police impact of the new stadium is uncertain until the traffic and parking plans are finalized. It will
likely be an iterative process to arrive at the best way to manage the traffic and pedestrian flow in the
area. We predict that the need for Police Services personnel could be similar to the current staffing
requirements. It is recommended that the current model of the University reimbursing the City for the
cost of police personnel be continued for the new stadium. An intergovernmental agreement should be
written to outline this general agreement. If this reimbursement continues, the number of police
officers needed for an event is irrelevant because it is cost neutral to the City.
Infrastructure Needs: Multi-Modal Transportation
Even with enhanced transit service and a robust implementation of traffic management strategies, there
are areas around campus that will be critical “pinch points” for the mobility of stadium attendees and
nearby residents. These are areas that require infrastructure changes to accommodate the additional
bike, pedestrian, and vehicular traffic.
In addition to major events (sellouts), it’s also important to consider the non-capacity events that will
occur at the stadium on a much more regular basis. Some of those may not have dedicated traffic
Page 6 of 13
control management and the transportation impacts need to be accommodated primarily with on-the-
ground infrastructure.
In locations needing changes for the stadium, it is strategic and fiscally responsible to select
infrastructure improvements that will not only address stadium mitigation but also meet more general
University needs. Therefore, the following documents were reviewed together:
Multi-Purpose Stadium Traffic Study – September 2014
The study tried to quantify the traffic in all modes related to a capacity event. This
included satellite parking south of campus with shuttle service, and a decrease of MAX
headways from 10 minutes to either 5 min or even 2 minutes (an increase of capacity of
2-5 times). Enhancement of the Neighborhood Parking Permit Program (RP3) is also
recommended. For vehicles, the study identified movements at five intersections that
are ‘critical’. It noted missing sidewalk elements on-campus and quantified pedestrian
and bike crossing volumes at the campus edge.
Colorado State University Parking and Transportation Plan – April 2014
This Plan discusses improvements to the transportation system by 2024 due to existing
and future campus needs. The list includes lane improvements to six (6) off-campus
intersections and provides a narrative on walking / biking needs.
Colorado State University Bicycle Master Plan
The Master Plan identifies network recommendations of both linear improvements
(pathways and protected bike lanes) and spot improvements at crossings /
intersections. Off-campus, this includes five (5) intersections and improvements to
many of the perimeter roadways (Shields, Prospect, Laurel, etc).
A review of the recommendations in the above reports coupled with a conceptual feasibility assessment
resulted in the following off-campus mitigation needs to accommodate the new stadium:
(See Attachment 2 map for relative locations)
Item Description Item #
on map
Est. Conceptual
Level Cost
1. Lane Improvements at five (5) intersections
a) Shields and Elizabeth Still under review # 1 $ 0.5 -1.0 million
b) Prospect and Shields WB right turn lane # 4 $ 0.5 -1.0 million
c) Prospect and Whitcomb Improve NB / SB left turn # 6 $ 0.5 -1.0 million
d) Prospect and Centre NB / SB double lefts # 8 $ 0.5 -1.0 million
e) College and Lake Lengthen NB left # 11 ~ $300,000
Subtotal: $ 2.0 – $4.3 million
2. Grade Separated Pedestrian and Bike Crossings at two (2) locations
a) Shields and Elizabeth # 2 $ 2.0 - 4.0 million
b) Prospect and Centre This includes connectivity to
north and south (sidewalks)
# 7 $ 2.0 - 4.0 million
Subtotal: $ 4.0 – $8.0 million
3. At-Grade Enhanced Pedestrian and Bike Crossings at four (4) locations
a) Shields and Pitkin Pedestrian hybrid HAWK signal # 3 ~ $ 75,000
b) Prospect at Mason Trail Enlarge crossing area # 9 ~ $ 50,000
Page 7 of 13
c) Laurel at Washington Add median and Rectangular
Rapid Flashing Beacon (RRFB)
# 12 ~ $ 100,000
d) Laurel at Sherwood Add median and center RRFB # 13 ~ $100,000
Subtotal: ~ $ 325,000
4. Intersection review at Prospect and College. Likely EB and WB
double lefts and addition of bike and pedestrian
accommodations (review potential for right turn islands and bike
connectivity to east).
# 10
$ 3.0 – $4.0 million
5. Prospect corridor improvement review per recommendations
from West Central Area Plan (WCAP). For stadium impact, the
most prominent needed improvement is the wide multi-use path
on north side.
# 5
$ 2.0 – $3.0 million
Although the perimeter roadways are of most concern to the City, there may be additional
improvements inside the perimeter that are needed for the overall efficient movement of stadium
attendees. As it relates to the City, upon initial review, these should at least include:
Item and Description Item #
on map
Est. Conceptual
Level Cost
6. Lake Street bike / pedestrian improvements per
recommendations from West Central Area Plan (WCAP). The
largest needed item here is the protected bike lane.
# 14
~ $ 1.0 million
7. Sidewalk improvements as listed in Campus Stadium Traffic
Impact Study (TIS page 74). This includes sidewalks on Whitcomb
that connect between Lake and Prospect Road.
--
Unknown
8. Intersection control review at Lake and Centre # 15 $ 0.5 – $1.0 million
Finally, management of stadium traffic, especially traffic related to more frequent but non-capacity
events that don’t include dedicated traffic control, will benefit greatly from the implementation of a
traffic responsive signal system.
Item and Description Item #
on map
Est. Conceptual
Level Cost
9. Traffic Responsive Signal System. This is a system that will
detect current vehicular traffic patterns and adjust signal timing
‘on the fly’ as conditions change. This system will especially
benefit non-capacity events that don’t utilize police controlled
intersections and operations for future growth of campus traffic.
Much of the ability to do this is already in place at the City’s
traffic management center, but additional detection at the 15
signalized intersections immediately adjacent to the University
will need to be installed and the management of the system
implemented.
--
~ $ 150,000
The overall cost range of needed transportation infrastructure improvement is $ 13 – $22 million.
About one third of the cost is in the two grade-separated pedestrian and bike crossings, and one third is
Page 8 of 13
in intersection improvements at six locations. The remaining costs mitigate impacts through a number
of smaller projects.
Note that the above list identifies specific infrastructure needs related to stadium impact on the City. It
doesn’t address other needs (both physical and management based) internal to the University such as
vehicle and bike parking, on-campus bike / pedestrian movements, and travel demand management.
Transportation Summary
As noted in the introduction, events at the multi-use stadium on campus will have a dramatic effort on
the area transportation system. Those impacts cannot be eliminated. However, the items noted above
will help to mitigate the largest of impacts for both sellout and smaller attendance events, and support
the needs and plans for Colorado State University in the future.
Infrastructure Needs: Utilities
Not all infrastructure impacts of an on-campus stadium can be seen above ground. City of Fort Collins
Utilities staff worked with CSU’s consultant team to review their analyses and determine impacts to City
utility systems and identify mitigations steps. This analysis includes Light and Power, Stormwater,
Wastewater, and Water Utilities.
Light and Power
Colorado State University uses its own electric distribution system, and can incorporate and
accommodate additional loads and service levels required by a new on-campus stadium. As a result,
there are no mitigable impacts to City of Fort Collins’ Light and Power utility.
Water Utilities
The proposed Multi-Purpose Stadium will have varying impacts on the City’s water, wastewater and
stormwater systems. The major effect will be on the wastewater system that will occur during large
events when 40,000 people are in attendance.
Utilities staff continues to working with Colorado State University staff and stadium consultants to
identify and evaluate the increased demands on the City’s water utilities systems. This memo
summarizes the impacts and outlines measures needed to mitigate the increase demands. Fort Collins
Utilities provides water, wastewater and stormwater services to Colorado State University. The manner
in which these services are provided is contained in the Water and Wastewater Service Allocation
Agreement between Colorado State University and City of Fort Collins Utilities as well as City Code.
Water
Colorado State University owns, operates and maintains the water distribution system on main campus.
Domestic water service for the stadium will be provided by the campus water system. The effects of
increased water demands resulting from the stadium will be addressed through the provisions of the
Service Allocation Agreement. The University’s campus water system will also provide a majority of the
fire protection needs for the stadium facility. The only added infrastructure in the City’s water
distribution system will be two fire hydrants connecting to the City water main in Lake Street. The costs
of installing these hydrants would be funded by the stadium project.
Page 9 of 13
Wastewater
The wastewater collection system on main campus is also owned, operated and maintained by the
University. This system does not have the necessary capacity to transport the projected wastewater
flows from the stadium facility. The City and stadium design team have reviewed and analyzed
alternative connections to the City wastewater collection system to carry the projected flows. The
selected alternative includes the construction of a sanitary sewer in Whitcomb Street from Lake Street
to an interceptor sewer in Wallenberg Drive. It is planned that this sewer would replace existing sewers
in Whitcomb as well as carry the stadium wastewater flows. From preliminary discussions with
University staff, it is anticipated that costs of the sewer improvements would be shared in proportion to
the sewer capacity utilized by City customers and by the proposed stadium. Following completion, the
sewer would be owned and maintained by the City.
In addition to the sewer in Whitcomb, it appears there may be some sewer capacity issues in
downstream portions of the City wastewater collection system. Additional analysis is being performed
to determine the extent of these potential problems. If mitigation is needed, provisions of the Service
Allocation Agreement would be followed and costs would be funded by the stadium project.
Stormwater
The stormwater system through campus is generally a mix of public stormwater and stormwater
generated by the CSU campus. There are two major storm sewer systems that run through campus:
a 42” storm drainage pipe that daylights near Spring Creek east of Centre Avenue; and,
a 36” storm drainage pipe that daylights into Spring Creek east of Centre Avenue.
An analysis of the existing storm sewer systems is in progress. Prior information indicates the systems
may be undersized for the drainage areas they serve. With the stadium proposal, the stadium will not
increase runoff into these systems during the 100-year storm.
The primary impact to the existing systems is in the form of water quality treatment. There is currently
no stormwater quality treatment in either of these systems and none is being proposed with the
stadium construction. A stormwater quality pond should be constructed at the outfall of the 42” pipe
and a proprietary mechanical BMP (Best Management Practices) treatment device is needed in the 36”
pipe. The stormwater quality pond would be constructed on land that is currently owned by the City
and CSU. There is no room for a similar facility on the 36” pipe, so the proprietary mechanical BMP
treatment device would likely be installed in City right-of-way or in the gravel parking lot owned by CSU
to the north of Spring Creek. It is anticipated that ownership and maintenance of the stormwater
quality pond and proprietary mechanical BMP would be shared by the City and CSU.
Conceptual preliminary costs of the sanitary sewer improvements in Whitcomb Street and stormwater
quality improvements are as follows:
Item and Description Est. Conceptual Level
Cost
1. Sanitary sewer in Whitcomb Street from Lake Street to
Wallenberg Drive.
2. Water quality pond at outfall of 42” storm sewer
3. Proprietary mechanical BMP on 36” storm sewer
$1.5 to $2.0 million
$75,000 to $100,000
$175,000 to $200,000
Total Utilities Infrastructure Improvements: $1.75 million to $2.3 million.
Page 10 of 13
Community and Neighborhood Character
It is important that CSU consider and integrate Community Character into the design and construction
of an on-campus stadium. Consideration must be given to items of community importance that help
define where we live and what makes Fort Collins unique and special. This includes things such as
preservation of view sheds, noise and lighting impacts, historic preservation, environmental sensitivity,
and retaining neighborhood vitality and character.
Neighborhood Impacts and Relations
The proposed location of an on-campus stadium will have a substantial impact to the surrounding
residential neighborhoods on game days and other events. Staff recommends the creation of a Stadium
Area Advisory Group and a Good Neighbor Fund to address and mitigate impacts to the neighborhoods.
Stadium Advisory Group/”Good Neighbor Fund”
Staff suggests that The University of Minnesota District Partnership be used as a model for developing a
Stadium Advisory Group and a Good Neighbor Fund. “The Alliance” was formed in 2009 and is used to
preserve homeownership, strengthen neighborhood livability, and develop a transformative vision for
the neighborhoods surrounding the Minnesota Stadium. The City would also be a partner in the
Advisory Group.
The vision for the Advisory Group is to work collaboratively with the University to attract students, staff,
researchers and faculty to “learn, live, play, and work in the area” by building a more diverse community
that draws people from across the age spectrum to the surrounding areas. The advisory group would
work closely with CSU on Master Plan principles and assist in identifying action steps in achieving both
short and long term goals and resource needs.
Staff further recommends that the Stadium Advisory Group form a committee to administer a Good
Neighbor Fund to enhance and protect the beauty, serenity and security of the neighborhoods impacted
by the operation of a CSU on-campus Stadium. The committee formed should include someone from
the Advisory Group, neighborhood organization representatives and at least one business association
representative. The fund committee is responsible on an annual basis for developing a budget, soliciting
proposals, reviewing applications and recommending expenditures from the Fund. Staff suggests that
project dollars be used to establish a fund. Other methods of funding may include: a ticket surcharge,
or contributions from the Alumni Association. Projects that might be funded through such a program
include: park and streetscape improvements, neighborhood planning, signage, way finding and
promotion of commercial districts and other content that promotes living in the neighborhood, youth
programs, etc. Beyond the direct, intended benefits of the individual projects, the University of
Minnesota and the surrounding neighborhoods have found the partnership has provided a means for
multiple neighborhoods to develop projects together that address a common purpose and provided a
vehicle for neighborhood commercial districts to partner with UMN Athletics on promotion and
marketing the area.
Noise and Lighting Impacts
Areas of primary concern voiced by nearby residents were the spillover effects of stadium-related noise
and lighting. The CSU design team addressed these issues in their preliminary reports, and subsequently
met with City of Fort Collins staff to discuss their assumptions, analysis and recommendations. City Staff
provided the CSU team with recommended mitigation measures to address concerns noted.
Page 11 of 13
Noise
City Staff analyzed the CSU design team’s reports and offered potential mitigation solutions for both
football games and concert events. Based upon CSU’s assumptions and noise contour map, City Staff
found that anticipated decibel levels during the football game, south of Prospect Road, primarily in the
High Density Mixed-Use Neighborhood, (H-M-N) zone and the Sheely neighborhood, exceed that which
is allowed by Section 20-21 of the City Code. The CSU study also indicates that amplified music concerts
have the potential for higher peak and average sound levels than sports events.
Recommended mitigation measures to address football game-related noise issues include:
Raising the wall at the south end of the stadium so that when combined with the scoreboard,
there is a more effective mass capable of lowering the off-site decibels impacting the R-L zone
district to the south. This wall could include live plant material as a feature to soften the mass
of the wall. These walls are sometimes referred to as “green screens” or “green walls”
depending on the scope of the plant material and its supporting elements.
Perform sound measurement analysis at Hughes Stadium, and its environs, for the benefit of
interested citizens. Such a field test could use real-time sound measurements during actual
football games at distances that approximate the distance from the south end of the proposed
on-campus stadium to the nearest residential property lines zoned R-L. Adjustments could be
made for stadium design and loud speaker arrangement. Such an exercise would allow
residents to experience the sound of a stadium P.A. system at a wide range of decibels.
Recommended mitigation measures to address concert-related noise at the stadium include:
Limit the number of concerts per year.
Establish a time certain conclusion for concerts.
Consider agreeing to hold concerts only on the granting of a special use permit (allowed by the
ordinance) or Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) from the City.
Preliminary coordination with concert sound company to discuss speaker orientation and sound
monitoring techniques
Lighting Impacts
City Staff also reviewed the CSU Design team’s lighting analysis and noted several areas of concern
related to spillover illumination to nearby residential areas and glare to motorists.
Recommended mitigation measures to address spillover illumination at the stadium include:
Provide a point by point illumination plan (photometric diagram) showing the foot-candles at
regular intervals as a result of all lighting sources, not just the sports lighting. Such a plan would
include all other exterior lighting, interior lighting that emits illumination through large windows
and any auxiliary lighting that may be associated with music concerts. Analyzing a photometric
diagram would reveal various hot-spots that would need to be addressed by reducing lighting or
by mitigation to block line-of-sight impacts.
Reduce the light impact on the H-M-N zone to the south of the Stadium or provide massing to
block the line-of-sight of the light sources. Such massing could potentially be provided along the
south end of the stadium in the area of the bridge/concourse to supplement the scoreboard.
Such massing would also have the benefit of blocking decibels from the P.A. system or amplified
music as noted in the analysis of the Noise Study.
Page 12 of 13
Environmental Impacts
Environmental Sustainability is a fundamental principle for the City of Fort Collins. In addition to the
operational and infrastructure impacts, it is important that CSU also identify and address environmental
impacts that occur as a result of stadium construction, demolition/deconstruction, and redevelopment
of the existing Hughes Stadium site. City of Fort Collins’ Environmental Sustainability Staff recommends
several “Best Practice” mitigation strategies that CSU should consider as part of the Design and
Construction processes:
Design Phase:
CSU should conduct an air quality impact analyses, evaluate greenhouse gas emissions and impacts, and
develop restorative, regenerative, and sustainable practices that support a “green” built environment
for the following scenarios:
Existing conditions
Build new stadium on campus, discontinue operations at and deconstruct Hughes Stadium
Build new stadium and continue some operations at Hughes stadium
CSU should address ozone formation in the ozone non-attainment area, Carbon monoxide (CO) hot
spots, and diesel particulate matter emissions, and use the results to inform street design, optimal
traffic flow patterns and infrastructure design for alternative modes of transportation. They should
maximize deconstruction practices, reuse and recycle building materials, and select sustainable
materials. CSU should minimize and recycle construction waste and incorporate energy efficiency into
any of the scenarios. Examples could include incorporating solar and wind energy production into site
and building design, developing innovative methods for utilizing thermal storage capacity and designing
enclosed spaces to the highest energy efficiency standards. CSU should maximize use of low impact
development principles, design for low water use and treatment and use of gray water and overall
ensure building operation and maintenance is optimized for sustainability.
Construction Phase:
During construction CSU should prohibit unnecessary vehicle idling, equip vehicles with auxiliary power
units, minimize construction equipment idling for warm up and cool down, and use ultra-low sulfur
diesel or bio-diesel fuels. These actions will minimize air pollutants from construction vehicles. To
reduce air emissions from any asphalt paving, CSU should discontinue paving operations on high ozone
days, conduct paving operations at night, use alternative materials such as gravel, concrete, warm mix
asphalt and use pervious pavement or pavers. Spray materials should be avoided and low or no Volatile
Organic Compound (VOC) materials should be utilized. A dust control plan incorporating best
management practices should be utilized.
Climate Action and Adaptation impacts:
CSU should estimate emission from new construction and determine strategies to offset these
emissions. They should determine the impact to increased GHG emission to GHG emission reduction
goals established by the City and determine strategies to offset. CSU should determine impact to the
city’s Climate Action Plan and Road to Zero Waste Plan, analyze the carbon footprint for the estimated
life of a new stadium and determine strategies to offset emissions. CSU should consider incorporating
into the design the ability to use the facility as a respite center for extreme heat, flood or fire episodes.
Finally, CSU should explore innovative ways for the new stadium and/or existing Hughes stadium to be
utilized for carbon sequestration.
Page 13 of 13
ATTACHMENTS
1. Map of Recommended Additional Transit Routes for Special Event Service
2. Map of Recommended Infrastructure Improvements
3. Summary Matrix of Recommended Mitigation and Costs
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
The following City Departments contributed to this analysis and report:
Planning, Development & Transportation
Engineering
FC Moves
Community Development and Neighborhood Services
Parking Services
Traffic Operations
Transfort
Utilities
Light & Power
Water Systems Engineering
Police Services
Sustainability Services (Environmental Sustainability)
City Manager’s Office
Communication and Public Involvement Office (CPIO)
Poudre Fire Authority
Attachment 1
Recommended Additional Transit Service
for CSU On-Campus Stadium Events
Attachment 2. Colorado State University – Multi-Purpose Stadium Multi-Modal Infrastructure Needs
Shields Corridor
1 Shields / Elizabeth: Lane Improvements
2 Shields / Elizabeth: Grade separated crossing
3 Shields / Pitkin: Enhanced pedestrian crossing
Prospect Corridor
4 Prospect Corridor: Discuss general recommendations from
West Central Area Plan (WCAP): Especially multi-use path on
north side
5 Prospect / Whitcomb: Lane Improvements
6 Prospect / Centre: Grade separated crossing and connectivity
to north and south.
7 Prospect / Centre: Lane improvements (NB/SB dual lefts)
8 Mason Trail Crossing: Enhancement to crossing area
9 Prospect / College: Review for intersection bike/ped
improvements and multi modal connectivity to east
College Corridor
10 College / Lake: lengthen NB left turn lane
Laurel Corridor
11 Laurel / Washington: Enhanced pedestrian crossing (RRFB and
median)
12 Laurel / Sherwood: Enhanced pedestrian crossing (median)
On-Campus Considerations
13 Lake Street: Multi-modal improvements identified in West
Central Area Plan (WCAP): Especially protected bike lane
14 Lake and Centre intersection control review
-- Side walk improvements as noted in Stadium TIS
(page 74)
Operational Improvements
Traffic Responsive Signal System. Enhanced detection and
management of signal system in the campus area that will
accommodate varying traffic levels ‘on the fly’.
1
2
3
6
7
4 8
10
9
11 12
13
14
5
1
Attachment 3.
Summary Table of Recommended Mitigation Actions
for CSU On-Campus Stadium
Operational Strategies Description Estimated Costs (if applicable)
Residential Parking Enforcement
Preferred Parking Permit Alternative $3,710 per event + $24,000 one
time
Alternative Parking Enforcement
option
$2,480 per event + $3,750 one time
Special Event Additional Transit Service Routes
Gillette Drive/Centre Avenue Route $7,040 per event
MAX Enhancement $6,400 per event
E. Prospect to I-25 to Whitcomb $15,360 per event
W. Elizabeth & W. Prospect $4,480 per event
On Campus Shuttle additional service $7,680 per event
Total Transit Costs: $21,760 per
event
Police Services Overtime expenses during games $70,000/season or $11,666 per
event x 6
consider use of special event permit or
MOU with CSU
Total Est. Operational Costs:
~$37,136 per game
Infrastructure Improvements
Transportation
Lane Improvements at Intersections
Shields/Elizabeth Still under review $0.5 - $1.0 million
Prospect/Shields WB right turn lane $0.5 - $1.0 million
Prospect/Whitcomb Improve NB/SB left turn $0.5 - $1.0 million
Prospect/Centre NB/SB double lefts $0.5 - $1.0 million
College/Lake Lengthen NB left ~$300,000
Subtotal: $2.3 - $4.3 million
Grade Separated Pedestrian and Bike Crossings
Shields/Elizabeth $2.0 - $4.0 million
Prospect/Centre Includes connectivity to north and
south sidewalks
$2.0 - $4.0 million
Subtotal: $4.0 - $8.0 million
At-Grade Pedestrian and Bike Crossings
Shields/Pitkin Pedestrian hybrid HAWK signal ~$75,000
Prospect/Mason Trail Enlarge crossing area ~$50,000
Laurel/Washington Add median and Rectangular Rapid
Flashing Beacon (RRFB)
~$100,000
Laurel/Sherwood Add median and RRFB ~$100,000
Subtotal: ~$325,000
Intersection Review at Prospect/College Likely EB and WB double lefts and
addition of bike and pedestrian
accommodations (review potential for
right turn islands and bike connectivity
to east).
$3.0 - $4.0 million
Prospect Corridor Improvements per WCAP For stadium impact, the most
prominent needed improvement is the
wide multi-use path on north side.
$2.0 - $3.0 million
Lake Street Pedestrian and Bike Improvements per
WCAP
2
Summary Table of Recommended Mitigation Actions
for CSU On-Campus Stadium
Infrastructure Improvements, Cont. Description Estimated Costs (if applicable)
Utilities
Waste Water Sanitary sewer in Whitcomb Street
from Lake Street to Wallenberg Drive
$1.5 - $2.0 million
Stormwater Water quality pond at outfall of 42”
storm sewer
$75,000 - $100,000
Stormwater Proprietary mechanical BMP on 36”
storm sewer
$175,000 - $200,000
Total Est. Utility Infrastructure
Costs: $1.75 - $2.3 million
Neighborhood Impacts Mitigation Recommendations:
Mitigation Description
Stadium Advisory Group Staff suggests that The University of Minnesota District
Partnership be used as a model for developing a Stadium
Advisory Group and a Good Neighbor Fund.
Neighborhood Mitigation “Good Neighbor” Fund Staff further recommends that the Stadium Advisory Group form
a committee to administer a Good Neighbor Fund to enhance
and protect the beauty, serenity and security of the
neighborhoods impacted by the operation of a CSU on-campus
Stadium.
Noise
Raise South Wall Raising the wall at the south end of the stadium so that when
combined with the scoreboard, there is a more effective mass
capable of lowering the off-site decibels impacting the R-L zone
district to the south.
Perform Sound Measurement Analysis at Hughes Stadium Field test could use real-time sound measurements during actual
football games at distances that approximate the distance from
the south end of the proposed on-campus stadium to the
nearest residential property lines zoned R-L.
Limit the number of concerts per year
Establish a time certain conclusion for concerts
Concerts held only by granting of special use permit or MOU
Preliminary coordination with concert sound company Discuss speaker orientation and sound monitoring techniques
Lighting
Provide an Illumination plan Provide a point by point illumination plan (photometric diagram)
showing the foot-candles at regular intervals as a result of all
lighting sources, not just the sports lighting.
Reduce south end light impacts Reduce the light impact on the H-M-N zone to the south of the
Stadium or provide massing to block the line-of-sight of the light
sources.
3
Environmental Mitigation Recommendations:
Mitigation: Design Phase Description
Conduct an air quality analysis Address ozone formation in the ozone non-attainment area,
Carbon monoxide (CO) hot spots, and diesel particulate matter
emissions, and use the results to inform street design, optimal
traffic flow patterns and infrastructure design for alternative
modes of transportation.
Support a “green” built environment Develop restorative, regenerative, and sustainable practices
Maximize deconstruction practices
Reuse and recycle construction waste
Incorporate energy efficiency into stadium design and operation
Maximize use of low impact design principles
Design for low water use and treatment; use of gray water
Optimize building operation and maintenance for sustainability
Mitigation: Construction Phase Description
Prohibit unnecessary vehicle idling
Equip vehicles with auxiliary power units
Use ultra-low sulfur diesel or bio-diesel fuels
Reduce air emissions from asphalt paving Discontinue paving operations on high ozone days, conduct
paving operations at night, use alternative materials such as
gravel, concrete, warm mix asphalt and use pervious pavement
or pavers
Spray materials should be avoided
Low or no Volatile Organic Compound (VOC) materials should be
utilized.
A dust control plan incorporating best management practices
should be utilized.
Climate Action and Adaptation Impacts
CSU should estimate emission from new construction and
determine strategies to offset these emissions.
CSU should determine the impact to increased GHG emission to
GHG emission reduction goals established by the City and
determine strategies to offset.
CSU should determine impact to the city’s Climate Action Plan
and Road to Zero Waste Plan, analyze the carbon footprint for
the estimated life of a new stadium and determine strategies to
offset emissions.
CSU should consider incorporating into the design the ability to
use the facility as a respite center for extreme heat, flood or fire
episodes.
CSU should explore innovative ways for the new stadium and/or
existing Hughes stadium to be utilized for carbon sequestration.
The largest needed item is the
protected bike lane.
~$1.0 million
Sidewalk Improvements per CSU Campus Stadium
Traffic Impact Study
Includes sidewalks on Whitcomb that
connect between Lake and Prospect
Road.
Unknown
Intersection Control Review Lake/Pitkin $0.5 - $1.0 million
Traffic Responsive Signal System This is a system that will detect current
vehicular traffic patterns and adjust
signal timing ‘on the fly’ as conditions
change.
~$150,000
Total Est. Costs for Transportation
Infrastructure:
$13 million - $22 million