HomeMy WebLinkAboutCOUNCIL - AGENDA ITEM - 10/28/2014 - NATURE IN THE CITYDATE:
STAFF:
October 28, 2014
Lindsay Ex, Senior Environmental Planner
Bruce Hendee, Chief Sustainability Officer
WORK SESSION ITEM
City Council
SUBJECT FOR DISCUSSION
Nature in the City
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
The purpose of this item is to request feedback from Council on Nature in the City, specifically on the results from
the project’s Inventory and Assessment (Phase One), the proposed direction for the Strategic Plan (Phase Two),
and the initial list of implementation actions (Phase Three) identified based on public engagement. Staff also will
review anticipated timing of deliverables to City Council and seek feedback.
Nature in the City is a project approved by Council in the 2014 Annual Appropriations Ordinance and is designed
to develop a 25-year vision for how all residents can access high-quality, natural experiences within a 10-minute
walk from where they live and work. The project was initiated in January 2014, and staff expects to bring the final
Strategic Plan to Council for consideration of adoption in early 2015.
GENERAL DIRECTION SOUGHT AND SPECIFIC QUESTIONS TO BE ANSWERED
1. What is Council’s feedback on the results from Inventory and Assessment (Phase One)?
2. Is the project headed in the direction Council expected?
3. Are there additional questions or thoughts Council would suggest staff explore?
BACKGROUND / DISCUSSION
Project Need
The City is transitioning from a large, suburban town to a small, urban city with a projected buildout population of
225,000 - 250,000 residents. As this happens, it is critical that we protect access to nature and the key open
spaces that define our community. Natural spaces within our urban setting are valuable not only as habitats and
for aesthetics, but they are also key to preserving quality of life, and the sense of place that makes Fort Collins
unique.
Project Overview
In 2014, the City launched Nature in the City to ensure that, as our community grows to its build-out population, all
residents have access to high-quality, natural spaces close to where they live and work. This effort will develop a
Nature in the City Strategic Plan with a primary objective to create and maintain access to nature within Fort
Collins, whether “nature” is a formal Natural Area, neighborhood park, or just the open space behind your home.
The project’s outcomes will include design guidelines, policies, and actions designed to achieve this goal.
An interdisciplinary team including City and CSU representatives is approaching the project in three phases:
1. Phase One: Inventory and Assessment (January to October 2014) - A triple bottom line (social, economic,
and environmental) approach served as the foundation for the Inventory and Assessment. With extensive
October 28, 2014 Page 2
collaboration between the City and CSU, the project team has completed the initial Inventory and
Assessment and has wrapped up the public outreach associated with this phase.
2. Phase Two: Strategic Plan (October 2014 - February 2015) - The Strategic Plan will include policies and
actions designed to achieve the broader project goal of providing high quality, access to nature for all the
City’s residents. A second component of this phase will include a mapping effort to assess connectivity
across the City and to help residents identify where they can access nature within a 10-minute walk.
3. Phase Three: Implementation (October 2014 - May 2015) - Project implementation will include the
development of design guidelines, regulatory updates, and incentives to achieve the strategic objectives
outlined in the Plan. Staff will also be installing the community’s first living, or green, wall in May of 2015.
Each of these phases is described in more detail below. The current focus of the project is developing the
framework for the Strategic Plan (Phase Two) and further exploring the ecological data collected this summer.
Project Update
Staff provided an update on the project to City Council in an April 9, 2014 memo (Attachment 1) and as a Staff
Report during the July 16, 2014 Council Meeting (video available here: <http://tinyurl.com/mxplaok>; note the
Nature in the City staff report begins at approximately 1:16:00). Since that update, additional outreach has been
completed and progress has been made on a number of tasks:
Phase One Inventory and Assessment
The purpose of this phase is to collect and analyze data to assess our existing natural assets/gaps from a
triple bottom line perspective. Staff began the project by collecting examples (precedents) from twelve cities
and ten projects in the United States and abroad (available here: fcgov.com/advanceplanning/pdf/case-
studies.pdf <http://www.fcgov.com/advanceplanning/pdf/case-studies.pdf>).
For each perspective of the triple bottom line (social, economic, and environmental), staff conducted a
literature review and collected local data. A summary of the results from each of these perspectives is
described below.
Social Inventory and Assessment
o Literature Review - While street trees, parks, and public green spaces may be thought of as
simply ways to beautify our communities and make life a little more pleasant, the science tells
us that they play a central role in human health and promote health and wellness within the
community. The articles reviewed support that incorporating nature into urban areas provides
key benefits for children, mental health, and overall health and well-being.
The Plug in to Nature study, by Larimer County, found that the biggest barrier for
accessing nature is time. Providing nature closer to home allows people to spend
their time experiencing nature, rather than traveling to it.
A California study of 3,000 teenagers found that they had a significantly lower Body
Mass Index (BMI) when in close proximity to nature or open spaces.
A United Kingdom study of over 1,000 people concluded that moving to an area with
green space will increase your mental health compared with those that move into an
area lacking open space. Another study found positive psychological benefits from
interacting in urban open space increased with species richness - in other words, the
greater the variety of species in a particular area, the happier people are in that
space.
o Local Feedback - The main tool utilized to gather feedback about the use and value of nature
in our community was via a survey. 365 surveys were received between March and
September 2014. The survey was initially piloted at the March 2014 Visioning Workshop as
well as in other focus groups, e.g., the Chamber’s Local Legislative Affairs Committee, and
October 28, 2014 Page 3
then refined based on feedback. Demographic data were collected to ensure that the findings
were relevant across a broad range of factors, including gender, age, income levels, race,
and where individuals live and work throughout the City.
Key findings are as follows:
Residents in Fort Collins strongly value access to nature (92% of respondents indicated
nature was important or very important to them).
Most residents feel they have easy access to nature (78% agree or strongly agree), but
note that a lack of time (94 respondents) and lack of easy access (48 respondents) are
the two biggest barriers to open space access.
The places residents most frequently access nature are the City’s Parks (305
respondents) and Natural Areas (283 respondents). Schools and community gardens
were popular for younger respondents.
Residents access nature within the community primarily for personal recreation or
exercise (203 respondents); to escape from the urban environment (186 respondents);
and to observe wildlife, plants and trees (139 respondents).
When asked what this project should focus on, given our current strengths and
weaknesses, four priorities emerged:
1. Provide opportunities to escape from the urban environment
2. Increase connectivity and opportunities for wildlife and plants (especially trees) to
thrive in the community
3. Provide places to find beauty, peace, and relaxation
4. Provide more opportunities for personal and group exercise or play, with an
emphasis on a connected network of these opportunities.
The full survey results are available as Attachment 3.
Economic Inventory and Assessment
o Literature Review - There have been many efforts to study the economic impacts of natural
spaces and features and such research has confirmed there is a positive relationship. Most
studies focused on measuring economic impact based on property value and assessed
whether being located near an open space or having specific features, e.g., trees, added
value. In general, studies indicate that adjacency to open space can command between a 20-
32% home sale premium; these increases dissipate the further a home is located from open
space.
o Local Feedback - Led by the Economic Health Office, staff met with a significant number of
business community organizations, primary employers, and ClimateWise partners to assess
how access to nature enhances business attraction and retention in Fort Collins (see
Attachment 2 for a full list of groups staff met with). In summary, the following is the
feedback from the business community:
Fort Collins commitment to nature has paid off:
City is attractive and considered to provide high quality of life, and
Nature does help with businesses recruit and retain employees.
Residential sales price premiums in Fort Collins are likely closer to 10% (this could
be due to the abundance of nature in Fort Collins);
The project should be mindful of added costs to development/business;
The business community encouraged staff to look for ways to “soften” commercial
areas, e.g., Downtown flowers;
Identify incentives and other partnerships to beautify commercial areas; and
Connections to natural spaces/recreation are important to almost every group.
October 28, 2014 Page 4
Ecological Inventory and Assessment
o Literature Review - The ecology of urban places is a recent field of study. Studies generally
examined species diversity across a rural to urban continuum and found that native species
diversity declines with increasing urbanization, while non-native species diversity increases to
a certain point (typically measured by building density) but also declines in highly urban
areas. Some research suggests that the loss of native species diversity can be mitigated by
incorporating native plantings into site design (currently required by the City’s Land Use
Code), but additional research at the urban scale is needed to support these conclusions.
o Local Data - In collaboration with CSU and the Wildlife Conservation Society, staff conducted
the following efforts this past summer:
Staff sampled 166 sites throughout the City from May - August 2014 for birds,
butterflies and vegetation. These species were selected for sampling as they tend to
respond at different scales (birds tend to respond more at the landscape-level
whereas butterflies tend to respond at the site scale), and they are relatively visible
and simple to sample.
Field data were collected across nine land use types - Parks, Natural Areas, schools,
trails, ditches, urban agriculture, residential open space, non-residential or
institutional open space, and Certified Natural Areas/Natural Habitat Buffer Zones.
88 species of birds and 33 species of butterflies were observed.
Preliminary analysis suggests land use, site area, distance to GMA and percent of
disturbed habitat are the strongest drivers of what was observed on the ground for all
species. A full list of variables can be seen in Table 1 below.
A report summarizing the findings from the field data will be completed by December.
Table 1: A full list of the variables (Characteristics of Site and Surroundings) analyzed in relation to a set of
standard metrics (Birds and Butterflies Metrics). Note that the strongest drivers observed are italicized.
Characteristics of Site and Surroundings Birds and Butterflies Metrics
Land Use Type (of the nine sampled) Species richness
Site area (acres) Urban adapted/Urban
sensitive/Neutral
Distance to GMA (Growth Management Area)
(feet)
Native/non-native species
Disturbed habitat (%) Resident/migrant species
Distance to Poudre River (feet) Habitat indicator species (from
Natural Areas data)
Canopy cover (%) Foraging (diet) guilds
Shrub cover (%) Foraging location guilds
People per minute Nesting location guilds
Dogs per minute Nesting height guilds
Building density at 1500 meters (approx. 0.93
miles)
Building density at 500 meters (approx. 0.31
miles)
Impervious surface (%)
Phase Two: Strategic Plan
This phase will include the development of a vision and mission statement and the policies/issues this
project will address moving forward. In addition, mapping during this phase will focus on assessing Citywide
connectivity and key opportunity areas for implementing Nature in the City. Key public engagement efforts
will include the October Super Issue Meeting with all City Boards and Commissions and discussions with the
October 28, 2014 Page 5
Citizens Advisory Committee.
The following policy/issue areas have been identified via the public engagement process and through the
interdisciplinary staff team:
o Continue the City’s current policies related to nature, e.g., Natural Areas and Parks program,
Stormwater Stream Restoration program, Land Use Code regulations, etc. that all contribute to
Nature in the City;
o Address connectivity, both for people and for wildlife, throughout the City;
o Determine how to “operationalize” a 10-minute walk to nature, e.g., should you not have to cross
an arterial street in order to access nature, which spaces count as nature, etc.
o Irrigation ditches - explore ways to encourage the multiple values of ditches, e.g., habitat values,
access, etc.
o Identify potential incentives for incorporating nature into new developments as well as retrofitting
existing developments. Consider Land Use Code changes, existing City programs, and the
potential for training HOAs and businesses to help establish and maintain these spaces;
o Encourage open space improvements at the neighborhood scale;
o Explore funding options to implement Nature in the City;
o Consider setting a Citywide biodiversity goal;
o Consider developing a Citywide target/metric for the ecosystem services nature provides in urban
areas;
o Promote and preserve urban agriculture to support social and ecological values;
o Explore ways to increase opportunities for incorporating natural features, e.g., native grasslands,
into the Parks system;
o Consider developing carbon sequestration goals in collaboration with the Climate Action Plan;
o Assess the feasibility of providing transit access to nature;
o Consider competing issues, e.g., how this project may influence the City’s efforts around West
Nile Virus;
o Consider establishing a Level of Service for nature within the City;
o Evaluate the City’s mowing and weed control policies as they relate to establishing native spaces;
o Encourage long-term monitoring of the City’s biodiversity;
o Explore wayfinding opportunities for natural opportunities throughout the City.
Phase Three: Implementation
Project implementation will focus on providing a range of tools for providing nature in the urban environment.
Initial implementation actions, as identified by staff and through public outreach, including the following:
o Develop design guidelines to illustrate how anyone can incorporate nature into their projects,
including information on cost, potential ecological and social benefit, and long-term maintenance
issues.
o Consider Land Use Code changes to clarify how open space requirements can be met, while also
enhancing social and ecological values;
o Explore incentives to achieve the objectives outlined in the strategic plan;
o Demonstrate how nature can be integrated into the built environment, e.g., staff, in collaboration
with the Urban Lab, will be installing the community’s first living, or green, wall in May of 2015.
o Identify potential partnership opportunities with Poudre School District and Colorado State
University to enhance open spaces on school grounds.
o Conduct a park-by-park assessment to identify how active and passive recreation goals can be
met while utilizing additional spaces for access to nature.
Community Engagement
Over 1,000 residents have engaged in the dialogue around how to provide access to nature close to home as
our community urbanizes. Engagement included outreach to the public, Boards and Commissions, and
October 28, 2014 Page 6
through collaboration internally in the City and with CSU. For a full list and description of outreach efforts,
please see Attachment 2. For the project’s public engagement plan, please see Attachment 6.
Public Outreach
Public engagement events included three open houses, a visioning workshop, a project survey, and
numerous focus group meetings. 365 residents responded to the project’s survey, and key themes heard to
date are described on page 4 and in Attachment 2.
In addition to the formal outreach events, a 15-member Citizens Advisory Committee (Attachment 4) is
providing feedback and direction for the project on a bi-monthly basis. Members of the Citizens Advisory
committee and other City Boards and Commissions participated in the video identifying what Nature in the
City means to them (viewable here: fcgov.com/natureinthecity <http://www.fcgov.com/natureinthecity>). Staff
participated in the City’s Full Circle program (viewable here: <http://tinyurl.com/od7svjw>). Staff also engaged
the community through a Nature in the City Photo Contest that garnered over 150 photo submissions
(viewable here: <http://iconosquare.com/tag/fcnature>).
Boards and Commissions
Staff discussed the project at the January and September Planning and Zoning Board Work Session and the
March and September Natural Resources Advisory Board Meeting. Staff has also met with the Land
Conservation and Stewardship Board (December 2013), Parks and Recreation Board (April), Senior Advisory
Board (June), and the Commission on Disability (August). Nature in the City is the main topic for the October
27 Super Issue Meeting with all Boards and Commissions. For a summary of feedback received from Boards
and Commissions to date, please see Attachment 2.
Coordination with City Departments and Colorado State University (CSU)
As this project has the potential to affect many City departments and requires the most up-to-date research,
staff has formed an interdisciplinary project team that includes 14 City Departments, including Natural Areas,
Parks, Stormwater, Economic Health, Social Sustainability, and more, as well as representatives from four
CSU departments:
Fish, Wildlife, and Conservation Biology - assisting with the design and analysis of the ecological
data; students in a senior-level wildlife management class are generating wildlife management plans
for 11 of the 166 sites sampled this past summer;
Horticulture and Landscape Architecture - student-generated concepts for the Living Wall and the
overall project;
The Institute for the Built Environment - serving as the project manager for the Living Wall (in
collaboration with the Urban Lab (http://urbanlab.colostate.edu) and assisting with the design
guidelines (a component of Phase Three of the project); and
The Center for Public Deliberation - assisting with public engagement.
Staff is also coordinating closely with the West Central Area Plan to identify potential “Nature in the City”
opportunities. A full list of participants in the project can be found in Attachment 4. Staff also worked with the
interdisciplinary project team to conduct a Triple Bottom Analysis (Attachment 6).
Next Steps
Key next steps for the project include the following:
Phase One: Inventory and Assessment
o Complete the analysis of the environmental data (December 2014)
Public Outreach: Once complete, we will coordinate a focus group with environmental
organizations to review the data and ask for feedback on the findings (Winter 2014)
October 28, 2014 Page 7
Phase Two: Strategic Plan
o Finalizing the project’s mission, vision and key goals (November 2014)
o Refine the list of issues and policies (November - December 2014)
Public Outreach: Super Issues Meeting on October 27, Citizens Advisory Committee
Meeting in December
o Draft Plan (November 2014 - January 2015)
Public Outreach: Online Survey, Draft Plan will be available for review online, and
outreach to Boards and Commissions (Winter 2015);
o Council adoption (Early Spring 2015)
Phase Three: Strategic Plan
o Develop the design guidelines (November 2014 - May 2015)
Public Outreach: Visual Preference Survey, to translate the priorities identified in the
Phase One Survey into elements that can be designed (November 2014)
o Living Wall Demonstration Project (installed in May 2015)
Public Outreach: Planned event with the Urban Lab to highlight numerous City and Urban
Lab projects (November) and media outreach and public engagement during installation
(May 2015)
o Land Use Code Changes (planned for the spring of 2015)
Public Outreach: To be determined.
ATTACHMENTS
1. April 9, 2014 Memo to City Council (PDF)
2. Phase One Outreach Summary (PDF)
3. Phase One Survey Results (PDF)
4. List of Citizen Advisory Committee and Project Team Representatives (PDF)
5. Nature in the City TBL Analysis (PDF)
6. Nature in the City - Public Engagement Plan (PDF)
7. Powerpoint Presentation (PPTX)
PHASE ONE
OUTREACH SUMMARY
Background
In 2014, the City launched an effort called
“Nature in the City” to ensure that, as our
community grows to its build-out population,
all residents have access to high-quality,
natural spaces close to where they live and
work. Whether it’s a formal natural area,
neighborhood park, or just the open space
behind your house, our primary objective is to
create and maintain access to nature within
Fort Collins.
Executive Summary
Over 1,000 residents have engaged in the
dialogue around how to provide access to nature
close to home as our community urbanizes. Key
themes heard to date are as follows:
• Find opportunities to (1) escape from the
urban environment, (2) find beauty, peace or
opportunities for relaxation, (3) support
wildlife, plants, and trees, and (4) engage in
personal or group/family exercise or play.
• Maintain our current policies, e.g., Parks and
Trails Master Plan and Natural Areas Master
Plan;
• Continue to increase connectivity across the
City, both for people and for wildlife;
• Identify ways to acknowledge the multiple
values ditches provide;
• Be cognizant of additional costs efforts like
these may add;
• Coordinate this effort with others, e.g.,
Climate Action Plan, Housing Affordability,
etc.;
• Provide better wayfinding to nature; and
• Address disparities in access across the
City.
Nature in the City Public Engagement
Boards and Commissions:
• Commission on Disability
• Land Conservation & Stewardship Board
• Natural Resources Advisory Board
• Parks and Recreation Board
• Planning and Zoning Board
• Senior Advisory Board
Public Engagement:
• Launched Project Website
• 15-member Citizens Advisory Committee
• City Employee Blog Post
• Idea Lab Question
• Trans. and Planning Joint Open House
• Visioning Workshop
• City Works 101 Participants
• Air Quality Open House
• Project Survey
• Wikimap
• CSU Natural Resources Class
• Partnership with CSU Graduate Level Landscape
Architecture Class
Public Engagement Feedback
Boards and Commissions
Since 2013, six City Boards and Commissions
have been engaged in the dialogue around
Nature in the City. Specific feedback from these
entities is as follows:
Commission on Disability
The Commission discussed how open spaces
are often inaccessible. Commissioners noted the
provisions outlined in the Poudre River
Downtown Plan for accessibility for all users and
encouraged staff to explore other opportunities
for providing access to nature that was
accessible. The Commission also discussed the
need for providing an off-leash dog area that was
less formal than the City’s existing dog parks.
Land Conservation and Stewardship Board
The Board expressed general support for the
project and requested staff returns if there is a
specific project the Board could support. The
Board also discussed funding for this effort and
how funding could be identified that would be in
addition to the existing open space sales taxes.
Natural Resources Advisory Board
The Board has identified Nature in the City as
one of the key projects in their 2014 Work Plan.
Feedback from the Board has focused on how to
mainstream Nature in the City into other city
programs, e.g., parks and stormwater. Additional
feedback has included how to consider the
services provided by nature, the need to
consider West Nile Virus with the implementation
of this planning effort, and how we increase
biodiversity across the City.
Parks and Recreation Board
The Board expressed an interest in this project
and noted specific parks where nature is
abundant, e.g., Indian Hills. The Board
expressed an interest in participating in the
Living Wall demonstration project. The Board
also asked staff to be clear on the costs of
implementing this project and including other
spaces in the mapping effort, e.g., HOA open
spaces.
Planning and Zoning Board
Staff is meeting quarterly with the Planning and
Zoning Board. In concurrence with the Parks and
Recreation Board, P&Z recommended including
many types of open space within the project
maps, e.g., schools and urban farms. The Board
also helped prioritize the overall project goals in
the spring of 2014.
This map illustrates the City’s Parks and Natural
Areas (in green) and those lands within a 10-
minute walking distsnce from those public lands.
Several Boards encouraged staff to include other
types of open spaces within these maps, e.g.,
HOA open spaces, schools, etc. Staff is working
to update this map accordingly.
2 NATURE IN THE CITY – OUTREACH SUMMARY – UPDATED SEPTEMBER 2014
Visioning Workshop
On March 26, 2014 at the Lincoln Center, over
60 Fort Collins residents participated in a
community issues forum sponsored by the City
of Fort Collins and the Colorado State University
Center for Public Deliberation. The forum
focused on two topics: (1) Nature in the City, and
(2) an update on the water restrictions plan.
The participants at the forum were placed in
individual round tables with 4-7 other participants
and a facilitator from the Center for Public
Deliberation (CPD). Martín Carcasson, the
Director of the CPD, facilitated the process, with
assistance from City staff, and connected to the
two topics. The forum was organized in several
different sessions that had the participants
respond to gathered information and various
prompts.
Participants prioritized the following values for
this project to emphasize:
1. Opportunities to escape from the urban
environment
2. Places that are convenient/close to
home, and
3. Wildlife opportunities (for both intrinsic
value and for viewing).
An interesting tension was identified by CSU in
the discussions and written comments among
participants that preferred “nature” to be as
natural, wild, and “minimally landscaped” as
possible, while others preferred their experience
with nature to be more managed and manicured.
For example, for some, concrete trails were a
negative, but for others, such man-made
features were important to provide access and a
quality experience. For some, having natural
spaces maintained was important; others
preferred more of the wild look. For some,
“critters” and bugs were a positive, for others, not
so much.
Another difficult tension that may arise is
between the focus on tranquility and open
spaces, with the reality that the spaces will likely
get busier and busier as the city grows. The
more popular a spot becomes the less desirable
it may become for some as well.
Lastly, Fort Collins is known for being a
wonderful town for both bicycling and dog
enthusiasts, and the city’s Parks and Natural
Areas are critical to both bicyclists and dog-
owners. On the other hand, problems with
bicyclists and dogs were the most common
concerns with Natural Areas when participants
were queried.
Regardless of which group staff spoke with,
the number one issue brought up was
connectivity – both for people and for
wildlife.
3 NATURE IN THE CITY – OUTREACH SUMMARY – UPDATED SEPTEMBER 2014
Business Community Outreach
Staff met with numerous individuals and groups
from the business community to understand how
access to nature attracts businesses and
employees to the community and whether
proximity to nature increases property or rental
values. Staff also sought general feedback about
the project from the business community.
Feedback generally focused on how Fort Collins’
commitment to nature has paid off – the City is
attractive and provides a high quality of life.
Access to nature does help businesses recruit
and retain employees. Anecdotal information
suggests a premium of approximately 10% for
lots adjacent to open space.
The business community asked staff to be
mindful of adding costs to the development
review process. They asked staff to look for ways
that partnerships could be increased to “soften”
commercial areas, e.g., the Downtown flowers.
They also asked if there were any programs that
could help encourage additional natural spaces
in commercial areas.
In alignment with others, the business
community also discussed the need for
connectivity through the City and that access to
natural or recreational spaces is very important.
Additional Open Houses or Events
Staff participated in or hosted numerous
additional events (see page 1 for a full list). At
each of these events, an overview of the project
was presented and surveys were administered
(either via keypad polling or paper surveys).
Key themes discussed at various events include
those summarized on page 1. One of the key
discussions with various parties included the
notion of disparity in access depending on where
you lived in the City. For examples, individuals in
North Fort Collins and those in older
neighborhoods felt disconnected from the City’s
open space network, even if it was nearby.
Potential solutions discussed were retrofitting
connectivity to these various spaces, increasing
wayfinding and looking at opportunities to restore
stormwater features or other, informal open
spaces in their neighborhoods.
A focus group held with residents of Fort Collins
Housing Authority apartment complexes (Photo
by Rebecca Smith)
Residents at various outreach events noted the
need to connect the City’s open space network.
In fact, connectivity was the number one issue
brought up at almost every focus group staff
held.
Other discussions focused on night skies – or the
opportunity to see the stars at night, which
benefits people and wildlife. Other ideas included
designing the transit system to include stops at
various open spaces throughout the City. There
were also several discussions around the
Project Survey
A project survey was developed to solicit
feedback from the community on whether nature
is important to them, where residents access
nature, why nature is important to them, and
what residents believe this project should focus
on, given current strengths and weaknesses. 365
surveys were received and the following graphs
summarize the findings from the survey.
In this survey, respondents prioritized the
following values for this project to focus on:
1. Find opportunities to escape from the urban
environment,
2. Create places or restore existing spaces to
find beauty, peace or opportunities for
relaxation,
3. Support wildlife, plants, and trees, and
4. Create additional opportunities to engage in
personal or group/family exercise or play.
Full survey results will be available at the
beginning of October on the project’s website at
www.fcgov.com/natureinthecity.
Next Steps
The next phase of this project will focus on
synthesizing the public outreach and developing
a strategic plan for how we can continue to have
high quality access to nature close to home.
Staff will be receiving feedback about the project
from City Council at their October 28, 2014 Work
Session. For additional outreach opportunities,
please see the project’s website.
Would you like to know more
about this project?
Lindsay Ex, Project Manager
(970) 224-6143
lex@fcgov.com
www.fcgov.com/natureinthecity
Visioning Workshop Participants were asked what three words came to mind when asked to define nature.
Note that wordles show which words appear more in the survey, via larger font sizes. In other words, the
larger the word, the more respondents used that word to describe nature.
5 NATURE IN THE CITY – OUTREACH SUMMARY – UPDATED SEPTEMBER 2014
PHASE ONE
SURVEY SUMMARY
Background
In 2014, the City launched an effort called
“Nature in the City” to ensure that, as our
community grows to its build-out population,
all residents have access to high-quality,
natural spaces close to where they live and
work. Whether it’s a formal natural area,
neighborhood park, or just the open space
behind your home, our primary objective is to
create and maintain access to nature within
Fort Collins.
Process
365 surveys were received between March and
September 2014. The survey was initially piloted
at the March 2014 Visioning Workshop as well
as in other focus groups, e.g., the Chamber’s
Local Legislative Affairs Committee, and then
refined based on feedback.
Surveys were presented via keypad polling
(“clickers”) or residents could complete them via
paper surveys. A copy of this survey is provided
at the end of this summary. Demographic data
were collected to ensure that the findings were
relevant across a broad range of factors,
including gender, age, income levels, race, and
where individuals live and work throughout the
City.
Due to multiple data sources, surveys were
analyzed in Excel.
What’s included in this document?
• A summary of the results from 365
respondents to the project’s survey
• Detailed results from the survey (page 2)
and comparison by demographics (page 10).
For more information about the project:
www.fcgov.com/natureinthecity
Summary of Findings
A project survey was developed to solicit
feedback from the community on whether nature
is important to them and why, where they access
nature, and on what they believe this project
should focus.
Key findings from the survey are as follows:
• Residents in Fort Collins strongly value
access to nature (92% of respondents
indicated nature was important or very
important to them).
• Most residents feel they have easy access to
nature (78% agree or strongly agree), but
note that a lack of time (94 respondents) and
lack of easy access (48 respondents) are the
two biggest barriers to open space access.
• The places residents most frequently access
nature are the City’s Parks (305
respondents) and Natural Areas (283
respondents). As staff spoke with younger
respondents, the numbers for schools and
community gardens/local farms rose steadily.
Project Survey Results by Question
Question 1: Is nature in
Fort Collins important to
you?
Most residents (92% or 231
out of 251) responded that
nature was either very
important or important to
them.
Question 2: Do you
access nature in the city?
Almost all (99%) residents are
able to access nature in the
city (225 out of 227
respondents).
2 NATURE IN THE CITY – OUTREACH SUMMARY – UPDATED SEPTEMBER 2014
Yes
99%
No 1%
Very Important
74%
Important
18%
Somewhat
Important
6%
Not Important
2%
No Preference
0%
Project Survey Results (cont.)
Question 3: Where do you access nature in the city?
The most cited place where residents access nature is in parks, followed closely by Natural Areas, and
then by streams, creeks, and canals.
Question 4: In
what part of the
City do you
access nature
most often?
Access to nature
was spread across
the City, with areas
in the northwest
part of town being
visited most often
(40%).
3 NATURE IN THE CITY – OUTREACH SUMMARY – UPDATED SEPTEMBER 2014
305 283
237
197
170
124 115
62
16 14 2
0
50
100
150
200
250
300
350
West of
College &
North of Drake
40%
West of
College &
South of
Drake
25%
East of
College &
North of
Drake
18%
East of
College &
South of
Drake
16%
I don't access
nature in the
city
1%
Project Survey Results (cont.)
Question 5: How often
do you choose to
access nature?
Most residents choose to
access nature either weekly
(51%) or daily (40%).
Question 6: I feel I have
easy access to nature
(within a 10-minute
walk).
Most residents agree that
they have easy access to
nature (78%).
4 NATURE IN THE CITY – OUTREACH SUMMARY – UPDATED SEPTEMBER 2014
Weekly
Daily 51%
40%
Monthly
8%
Annually
1%
Other
0%
Strongly
Agree
59%
Agree
29%
Disagree
6%
Neither Agree
or Disagree
5%
Strongly
Disagree
1%
Project Survey Results (cont.)
Question 7: What barriers prevent you from accessing nature?
The biggest barrier to accessing nature is lack of time (n=94), with lack of easy access being the second
most common barrier (n=48).
Question 8: Why do you choose to spend time in nature?
The most common reason people choose to spend time in nature is for personal exercise or play (n=203).
5 NATURE IN THE CITY – OUTREACH SUMMARY – UPDATED SEPTEMBER 2014
203
186
139 138
95
75
56 45
37
22
0
50
100
150
200
250
94
48
36
31 30 29 29 29
16
12 10
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
Project Survey Results (cont.)
Question 9: Which of these values are most important for you in your neighborhood?
As with question 8, the most important reason people access nature in the neighborhood is for personal
exercise or play. However, the opportunity to experience beauty, peace or feel relaxed moved from #4 to
#2 in terms of preference.
190
154
144
118 110
77
66 59
47
13
0
20
40
60
80
100
120
140
160
180
200
6 NATURE IN THE CITY – OUTREACH SUMMARY – UPDATED SEPTEMBER 2014
Project Survey Results (cont.)
Question 10: Considering our current strengths and weaknesses, which of these values
should this project focus on the most for the city overall?
In this question, the opportunity to escape from the urban environment moves to the top most preferred
value to focus on, with wildlife, plants, and trees being the second most preferred item. Of note is that
these priorities were consistent overall based on demographics, but that males wanted the project to focus
on personal exericse or play as their second priority for the project.
Question 11: What part of
the City do you live in (by
quadrant)?
The majority of residents that
responded lived in the
northwest quadrant of town.
0
20
40
60
80
100
120
140
160
180
200
7 NATURE IN THE CITY – OUTREACH SUMMARY – UPDATED SEPTEMBER 2014
West of
College and
North of Drake
37%
East of
College and
South of
Drake
21%
West of
College and
South of
Drake
19%
East of
College &
North of Drake
17%
Don't live in
the City'
6%
Project Survey Results (cont.)
Question 12: Which
part of the City do
you work in (by
quadrant)?
Respondents work in a
variety of places across
the City.
Question 13: Do you own or rent
your residence?
Respondents were nearly split on home
ownership versus being renters.
Question 14: What is your
gender?
Overall, more females responded to
the survey than males.
8 NATURE IN THE CITY – OUTREACH SUMMARY – UPDATED SEPTEMBER 2014
East of
College &
North of Drake
30%
Don't
currently
work/am
retired
16%
West of
College &
North of Drake
15%
Am a student
14%
West of
College &
South of
Drake
11%
Work outside
Fort Collins
7%
East of
College &
South of
Drake
7%
Own
60%
Rent
40%
Female
58%
Male
42%
Project Survey Results
(cont.)
Question 15: What is your race?
Approximately 85% of respondents are
white, with approximately 5% of the
respondents being Hispanic. The remaining
10% of repsondents are multi-racial (2.4%),
prefer not to answer (2.4%), and less than
1% each of Asian, Native American, Black,
and Hawaiian/Pacific Islander respondents.
Fort Collins Demographics from 2012
indicated the population is approximately
82.5% white, 10.3% Hispanic, 2.0% Black,
1.7% Native American, 4.1% Asian, 0.3%
Hawaiian/Pacific Islander, and 2.4% is
another race.
Question 16: What is your
household income?
Respondents had varying
income levels. Preferences for
different values did not vary
greatly among the different
income levels, and across
every income level – the
opportunity to escape from the
urban environment was
prioritized.
Question 17: What is your
age?
A variety of folks of different
age groups responded to the
survey.
9 NATURE IN THE CITY – OUTREACH SUMMARY – UPDATED SEPTEMBER 2014
White
Hispanic
Multi-racial
Prefer not to answer
Asian
Native American
Black
Hawaiian/Pacific Islander
$88,000-
149,999
24%
$22,000-
58,999
19%
$21,999 or
less
19%
Prefer not to
answer
14%
$59,000-
87,999
13%
$150,000-
249,999
8%
$250,000 or
Project Survey Results (cont.)
Analysis: How do project priorities compare across income levels?
In general, the top three priorities found overall (escape from the urban environment; widllife, plants and trees; and to experience beauty, peace or
feel rejuvanated) were consistently in the top three priorities for all income levels. As income levels increased, family exercise or play was also
identified as a top priority. Note that only 8 respondents to the survey indicated an income over $250,000, and the priorities in this income level
varied greatly, likely as a result of the low number of respondents sampled.
Income Levels
$21,999 or
less
$22,000-
58,999
$59,000-
87,999
$88,000-
149,999
$150,000-
$249,999
$250,000 or more* Prefer not to
Answer
Priorities
Top
Priority
Escape from
the Urban
Environment
Wildlife,
Plants, Trees
Escape from
the Urban
Environment
Escape from
the Urban
Environment &
Family Exercise
or Play
Escape from
the Urban
Environment
Escape from the
Urban Environment;
Family exercise or
play; To Experience
Beauty, Peace or
Feel Rejuvenated;
and Wide Open
Spaces
Escape from the
Urban Environment
Second
Priority
Wildlife,
Plants, Trees
Escape from
the Urban
Environment
To Experience
Beauty, Peace
or feel
Rejuvenated
Wildlife, Plants,
Analysis: How do project priorities compare across genders?
In general, the top priorities for men and women were comparable, with men prioritizing family/group exericse or play slighlty higher than women.
Gender
Male Female
Priorities
Top Priority Wildlife, Plants, and Trees Wildlife, Plants, and Trees
Second
Priority
Family/group exercise or play Escape from the Urban Environment & To Experience Beauty, Peace or feel
Rejuvenated
Third Priority Escape from the Urban
Environment
Family/group exercise or play
Analysis: How do project priorities compare across home ownership versus renters?
Both home owners and renters prioritized the opportunity to escape from the urban environment and wildlife, plants, and trees, but their third
priorities differed. For renters, family/group exercise or play ranked #7 overall, while it ranked #3 for home owners. The opportunity to experience
beauty, peace or feel rejuvanted was ranked #3 for renters and #4 for home owners.
Home Owners Renters
Priorities
Top Priority Escape from the Urban Environment Escape from the Urban Environment
Second Priority Wildlife, Plants, and Trees Wildlife, Plants, and Trees
Third Priority Family/group exercise or play To Experience Beauty, Peace or feel Rejuvenated
11 NATURE IN THE CITY – OUTREACH SUMMARY – UPDATED SEPTEMBER 2014
Analysis: How do project priorities compare across where people live?
In general, the top priorities were consistent regardless of where respondents lived in the City, with those West of College prioritizing personal or
family exercise or play in their top three priorities.
East of College & North of
Drake
East of College &
South of Drake
West of College
& North of
Drake
West of College
& South of
Drake
Don’t live in the City
Priorities
Top
Priority
Wildlife, Plants, and Trees Escape from the
Urban Environment
Escape from the
Urban
Environment
Escape from the
Urban
Environment
Wildlife, Plants, and Trees
Second
Priority
Escape from the Urban
Environment & To
Experience Beauty, Peace or
feel Rejuvenated
To Experience
Beauty, Peace or
feel Rejuvenated
Wildlife, Plants,
and Trees
Wildlife, Plants,
and Trees
Family exercise or play
Third
Priority
Convenience/It’s Close to
Home and To be Close to or
Enjoy Water
Wildlife, Plants,
and Trees
Personal
exercise or play
Family/group
exercise or play
Escape from the Urban
Environment; Convenience/It’s
Close to Home and To Experience
Beauty, Peace or feel Rejuvenated
12 NATURE IN THE CITY – OUTREACH SUMMARY – UPDATED SEPTEMBER 2014
Analysis: How do project priorities compare across age groups?
In general, at least two of the top three priorities found overall (escape from the urban environment; widllife, plants, and trees; and to experience
beauty, peace or feel rejuvanated) were consistently in the top three priorities for all age groups. Note there were few respondents who were above
the age of 75 or who preferred not to answer this question on the survey.
Age Groups
Under 18 18-24 25-34 35-44 45-54 55-64 65-74 75+ Prefer not
to Answer
Priorities
Top
Priority
Wildlife,
Plants,
Trees
Escape from
the Urban
Environment
Escape from
the Urban
Environment
& Wildlife,
Plants, and
Trees
Wildlife,
Plants,
Trees
Family/group
exercise or
play
Wildlife,
Plants, and
Trees
Personal
exercise or play
Wildlife,
Plants,
and
Trees &
To Walk
my
Dog/Pet
Escape from
the Urban
Environment
& To
Experience
Beauty,
Peace or
Feel
Rejuvenated
& Wide
Open
Spaces
(only
priorities
identified in
this group,
and all were
the same)
Second
Priority
NATURE IN THE CITY:
SURVEY
1) Is nature in Fort Collins important to you?
a. Not important
b. Somewhat important
c. Important
d. Very important
e. No preference
2) Do you access nature in the city?
a. Yes, see questions 3 and 4
b. No. If not, why do you not access nature
in the city?
_____________________________
3) Where do you access nature in the city?
(choose all that apply)
a. Natural Areas
b. Parks
c. Open space in my neighborhood (HOA
or other)
d. Open space at my office or where I shop
e. Schools
f. Community gardens or local farms
g. Streams, creeks or canals
h. Trails
i. I don’t access nature
j. I don’t access nature within the city
k. Other ______________________
4) In what part of the city do you most often access
nature?
a. East of College & North of Drake
b. East of College & South of Drake
c. West of College & North of Drake
d. West of College & South of Drake
e. I don’t access nature in the city
5) How often do you choose to access nature?
a. Daily
b. Weekly
c. Monthly
d. Annually
e. Other ______________________
6) I feel I have easy access to nature (within a 10-
minute walk)
a. Strongly Agree
b. Agree
c. Neither agree or disagree
d. Disagree
e. Strongly Disagree
7) What barriers prevent you from accessing
nature? (choose all that apply)
a. Lack of easy access, e.g., major
street/railroads/traffic
b. Unsafe/Afraid/Fear
c. Lack of infrastructure, e.g., no
sidewalks, trail, or parking
d. Too crowded
e. Didn’t know it existed
f. Not handicap accessible
g. Restrictions (no dogs, seasonal
closures, cost)
h. On private land
10) Considering our current strengths and
weaknesses, which should this project focus on
the most for the city overall? (rank top 3 values in
order)
___ Escape from urban environment/
Fresh Air
___ Wildlife (intrinsic value or viewing),
Plants, Trees
___ Personal exercise or play
___ Family exercise or play
___ Convenience/It’s Close to Home
___ To Experience Beauty, Peace, or feel
Rejuvenated
___ To be Close to or Enjoy Water
___ To Walk My Dog/Pet
___ Wide Open Spaces
___ Maintain current status
___ Other ______________________
11) What part of the city do you live in (by quadrant)?
a. East of College & North of Drake
b. East of College & South of Drake
c. West of College & North of Drake
d. West of College & South of Drake
e. Don’t live in the city
12) What part of the city do you work in?
a. East of College & North of Drake
b. East of College & South of Drake
c. West of College & North of Drake
d. West of College & South of Drake
e. Work outside Fort Collins
f. Don’t currently work/am retired
g. Am a student
13) Do you own or rent your residence?
a. Own
b. Rent
14) What is your gender?
a. Male
b. Female
15) What is your race?
a. Asian
b. Black
c. Hispanic
d. White
e. Native American
f. Hawaiian/Pacific Islander
g. Multi-racial
h. Prefer not to answer
16) What is your household income?
a. $21,999 or less
b. $22,000-58,999
c. $59,000-87,999
d. $88,000-149,999
e. $150,000-$249,999
f. $250,000 or more
g. Prefer not to answer
17) What is your age?
a. Under 18
b. 18-24
c. 25-34
d. 35-44
Nature in the City
Citizens Advisory Committee
Stakeholder Group Individual Affiliation
Local Expert Dave Leatherman
Environmental Group Rick Schroeder (former president
of local Audubon Chapter)
Former president of local Audubon
Chapter, retired biologist
Business Representative Nick Haws Fort Collins Chamber of Commerce,
engineer with Northern Engineering
Design community Roger Sherman BHA, Inc.
Health Community Kim Barman CanDo, UC Health
Citizen Representative Bryan Tribby Also with CSU
HOA Representative Todd Spiller Harvest Park HOA
Senior Citizens Joann Thomas Senior Advisory Board
Poudre School District Michael Spearnak PSD
Landscape installer Lorin Bridger Waterwise Landscapes
Larimer County Rob Novak Education (lead on Plug in to
Nature)
Urban Agriculture Michael Baute Spring Kite Farms
CSU Student Trace Evans CSU
Natural Resources Joe Piesman Natural Resources Advisory Board
Health/Hispanic Community Edgar Dominguez CanDo/Vida Sana
Nature in the City
Project Team Representation
City Departments CSU Departments
Community Development and Neighborhood Services Center for Public Deliberation
Communications and Public Involvement Fish, Wildlife and Conservation Biology
Customer Connections (Utilities) Horticulture and Landscape Architecture
Economic Health Institute for the Built Environment
Environmental Services
FC Moves Additional Partners
Information Technology Urban Lab
Light and Power (Utilities)
Natural Areas
Parks
Parks Planning and Development
Social Sustainability
Water Engineering and Field Services (Utilities)
Triple Bottom Line Analysis Map (TBLAM)
Project or Decision: Nature in the City brainstorm and discussion,
post-breakout session Evaluated by:
City-wide interdisciplinary
team of staff experts
Social Economic Environmental
STRENGTHS:
• Improves understanding of current access and potential
gaps
• Current population in the City understands and recognizes
the benefits of natural and ecological functions and assets
• Willingness to pay for access to nature, e.g., HOAs
• Maintain and improve local habitat for species
• Topic supports City Plan and other master plans –
alignment with adopted plans
• Bring awareness to pocket areas in town that have been
neglected
• Bragging rights for the City – demonstration community
STRENGTHS:
• As land redevelops, how do we still accommodate
nature/natural amenities?
• Willingness to pay for access to nature, e.g., HOAs
• Could stimulate reinvestment in certain areas in close proximity
to natural assets, e.g., Odell Brewing Co.- for both home
owners and businesses
• Bragging rights for the City – demonstration community
STRENGTHS:
• Improves understanding of current access and potential
gaps
• Willingness to pay for access to nature, e.g., HOAs
• Maintain and improve local habitat for species
• Bring awareness to pocket areas in town that have been
neglected
• Bragging rights for the City – demonstration community
• Identifying and protecting informal natural areas
• Process could discover new environmental assets
• Improves our understanding of connectivity between
habitat patches
• Gain better understanding of what wildlife and vegetation
we have in the City
LIMITATIONS:
• As land redevelops, how do we still accommodate
nature/natural amenities?
• Intentions not aligned with expectations – not everyone
wants wildlife in their backyard, conflicting opinions on this
issue
• Existing policies/regulations may not be in alignment with
this project’s vision
• Outdated GIS layers
• Existing ditch system structure not conducive to multi-
functional use of land
• Private property concerns, government involvement and
how far we go with regulating this
• Defining nature is difficult, which could make establishing a
baseline experience difficult, e.g., how do we convey that a
“poor quality area” from an ecological perspective still has
value?
• How do we balance the need for smart growth with the
need for environmental protection? When there is a conflict,
who wins?
OPPORTUNITIES:
• Collaboration potential between neighbors and developers
• To make some areas multi-functional, multi-jurisdictional
• Partnerships with PSD and CSU, provide kids to access,
ensure 10 minute walk to schools
• Opportunities for public/private partnerships in building,
maintaining, etc.
• Collaboration at the local level could lend itself towards
enhanced neighborhood cohesion – enhance social
cohesion
• Opportunity for ownership in small pockets of the
community
• Improved air and water quality with more natural systems
• Revisit policies to obtain alignment, e.g., irrigation ditches
• Update GIS layers
• Build on existing programs, e.g., Climatewise and Certified
Natural Areas, and alignment with City’s vision
• As redevelopment occurs, opportunity to increase access to
nature, and we could be a demonstration of what’s possible
• More progressive legal strategies, other tools in our
conservation toolbox
• Create the processes for collaborations to occur, e.g.,
Prospect and Timberline or residences
• Bring in the irrigation ditch system
• Incentivize residential landscaping as opposed to regulating
it, shift landscape aesthetic
• Encourage volunteerism through incentives
• Honor and recognize competing missions – find a way to
support them both and ID what collaborations arise
• Greater access to the environment – create more chances
for positive interactions, better stewardship of nature and
the environment
• New inventory data collection presents an opportunity to
make “discoveries”. Also an opportunity to share the data
(discoveries) with the public. May enhance the experience
at sites.
• Promote the relationship between physical health and the
environment
• Opportunity to educate neighbors that “Nature Areas” with
taller grasses do not necessarily mean that homes are
more vulnerable to wild fires. This would help to educate
neighbors of City-owned natural areas as well.
OPPORTUNITIES:
• Give bonus credits for providing access to nature or by locating
a project within the 10 minute walking distance (Give bonus
credits when considering public financing (URA, business
assistance) if a property/business owner provides access to
nature or by locating a project within the 10 minute walking
distance)
•
• Opportunities for public/private partnerships in building,
maintaining, etc.
• Amenity that can be sellable, livability component that can
affect a project’s bottom line
• Property values increase when in close proximity to natural
areas
• Collaboration at the local level could lend itself towards
enhanced neighborhood cohesion – enhance social cohesion
• Improved air and water quality with more natural systems
• Revisit policies to obtain alignment
THREATS:
• Could limit affordability of housing in Fort Collins
• May need to find alignment with groups in towns they aren’t
supportive of these types of efforts/plans (SDIC)
• More interactions with nature may create more conflicts
with nature
• More access/more use could lead to degradation
• Future population growth – could impact access,
experience,
• Maintenance costs could increase in native habitats, e.g.,
weed management, etc.
• Enforcement of regulations could increase costs
• More public lands = more removal of lands from the
property tax roll and affects the budget
• Conflict potential between neighbors and developers
• Fear of “Nature Areas” providing fuel for fires.
THREATS:
• Could limit affordability of housing in Fort Collins
• More access/more use could lead to degradation – more costs
to maintain
• Maintenance costs could increase in native habitats, e.g.,
weed management, etc.
• Enforcement of regulations could increase costs
• More public lands = more removal of lands from the property
tax roll and affects the budget
• Existing ditch system structure
• Could affect affordability for businesses to relocate/expand in
Fort Collins
• Less public revenue to support these efforts, e.g., budget cuts,
failed tax initiatives
THREATS:
• More interactions with nature may create more conflicts
and/or safety concerns with nature
• More access/more use could lead to degradation
• Future population growth – could impact access,
experience,
• Maintenance costs could increase in native habitats, e.g.,
weed management, etc.
NOTES:
Form Completed January 2014 This form is based on research by the City of Olympia and Evergreen State College
PUBLIC ENGAGEMENT PLAN
PROJECT TITLE: NATURE IN THE CITY
OVERALL PUBLIC INVOLVEMENT LEVEL: Involve/Collaborate
KEY STAKEHOLDERS:
• City Departments, especially Natural Areas, Utilities, Parks, and Sustainability
• Colorado State University, e.g., Conservation Development Research Team and the Institute for Built Environment
• Business Associations, development community and design professionals
• Environmental groups
• Interested citizens, general public
• Poudre School District
• CanDo
• Homeowners Associations
• Larimer County
BOTTOM LINE QUESTION: As our development patterns change from greenfield development to infill and
redevelopment, how do we ensure every citizen access to nature?
TIMELINE: November 2013 – March 2015
Phase 1: Involve/Collaborate
Timeframe: November 2013 – August 2014
Description: This phase will assess our existing assets/gaps of Nature in the City from a triple bottom line
perspective. The public engagement will focus on collecting data to support the inventory/assessment.
Key Messages:
• We will solicit feedback on what we mean by access to nature, e.g., develop a spectrum (based on
feedback) of what ideal vs. acceptable. vs. unacceptable access to nature looks like
• We want to understand what areas, species, and other aspects of nature are important to our community,
e.g., we could ask questions such as the following:
o Where are the special places you like to visit? What spaces do you walk/bike/drive to/through?
o What species are important to you? Where do you see them?
o What are key viewsheds or viewing corridors? Do you see these when walking, driving, etc.?
o What spaces do you want to make sure we don’t lose?
o What does nature in the city mean to you? (nature within city limits/growth management area)
• We are assessing where the gaps and opportunities are within our existing natural system from a triple
bottom line perspective.
Tools and Techniques
• Social media – website, facebook, twitter, Idea Lab, Next Door – to solicit initial ideas, announce events,
and for project updates
• Citizens Advisory Committee – to help frame questions, design public engagement efforts, and provide
feedback on project direction
• Open House/Focus Groups/Survey – to solicit responses on overall questions
• Online, Interactive Mapping Tool and Survey – to solicit responses from a spatial perspective to the above-
listed questions
• Boards/Commissions/Council – for feedback and direction
• Inventory – provides opportunity to engage with the public and share the project’s messages
1 Nature in the City – Draft Public Engagement Plan
PHASE 2: Involve/Collaborate
Timeframe: August 2014 – December 2014
Description: This phase will focus on understanding our opportunities and challenges based on the assessment. A
strategic plan will be developed to address the critical issues uncovered in Phase One.
Key Messages:
• Now that we understand where the gaps/strength areas are, what strategies should be prioritized to fill in
those gaps?
• What policies should be established to ensure that these strategies are implemented, e.g., a policy of a 10-
minute walk to accessible nature?
• We’re seeking to align various efforts between departments
Tools and Techniques:
• Social media – website, facebook, twitter, Next Door –announce events, project updates
• Citizens Advisory Committee – to review data collected, identify strategies for filling in the gaps
• Open House/Focus Groups – review proposed strategies and offer additional ideas/strategies
• Boards/Commissions/Council – for recommendations and adoption
PHASE 3: Inform and Consult
Timeframe: December 2014 – March 2015
Description: This final phase will be the development of regulatory changes, e.g., the development review process,
and/or design guidelines to help implement the strategic plan adopted in Phase 2.
Key Messages:
• We’re developing the tools necessary to implement the strategic plan, e.g., what tools can a resident,
business owner, or developer utilize to incorporate Nature in the City?
• We’re developing incentives (other tools?) to encourage Nature in the City elements in the gap areas
identified in the City.
Tools and Techniques:
• Social media – website, facebook, twitter, Next Door –announce events, project updates
• Citizens Advisory Committee – review regulatory changes proposed, offer suggestions
• Open House/Focus Groups – review proposed strategies and offer additional ideas/strategies
• Boards/Commissions/Council – for recommendations and adoption
2 Nature in the City – Draft Public Engagement Plan
1
City Council Work Session
Bruce Hendee, Lindsay Ex
October 28, 2014
NATURE IN THE
CITY
2
QUESTIONS FOR COUNCIL
1.What is Council’s feedback on
the results from Inventory and
Assessment (Phase One)?
2.Is the project headed in the
direction Council expected?
3.Are there additional questions
or thoughts Council would
suggest staff explore?
3
WHAT IS THIS PROJECT’S
FOCUS?
• Complement existing
programs by identifying
linkages between public
and private lands.
• Ensuring access to
nature in the urban
environment;
• Enhance or restore
places throughout the
City;
• Seeking a variety of
experiences at all
scales; and
• Providing access close
Nashville Naturally Plan for Downtown
(The Conservation Fund)
4
PROJECT GOAL:
DEVELOP A VISION FOR
INCORPORATING NATURE INTO THE
URBAN ENVIRONMENT
5
INVENTORY AND ASSESSMENT:
SOCIAL
VALUE TO PEOPLE (SOCIAL)
• What are the benefits of nature
(physical and mental health, social
interactions, etc.)?
• How do people use and value nature?
§ Build on existing work
§ Informal and formal natural spaces
6
INITIAL FINDINGS: Where do people access
nature in the city?
INVENTORY AND ASSESSMENT:
SOCIAL
0
100
200
300
400
7
INITIAL FINDINGS: What is most important for
this project to focus on?
0
40
80
120
160
200
INVENTORY AND ASSESSMENT:
SOCIAL
8
INVENTORY AND ASSESSMENT:
SOCIAL
INITIAL FINDINGS – ADDITIONAL FINDINGS
• Connections to natural
spaces/recreation are important – for
people and for wildlife
• Other feedback:
• Wayfinding,
• Disparities across the City in
access,
• How to achieve this without adding
(too much) cost
9
INVENTORY AND ASSESSMENT:
ECONOMIC
KEY QUESTIONS: VALUE TO PEOPLE
(ECONOMIC)
• How does access to nature affect
property values?
• How does access to nature affect
business attraction, retention, etc.?
• What ecosystem services do these
spaces provide?
10
INITIAL FINDINGS –
LOCAL FEEDBACK
• Fort Collins commitment to
nature has paid off
• Be mindful of added costs
to development/business
• Seek ways to “soften”
commercial areas
• Identify incentives and
other partnerships to
beautify urban areas
• Connections to natural
spaces/recreation are
important
INVENTORY AND ASSESSMENT:
ECONOMIC
Photo Credit: Mrp 2863198
11
INVENTORY AND
ASSESSMENT:
ENVIRONMENTAL
• How do various
sites contribute
to the City’s
wildlife habitat?
• How does site
size, landscape
position, land
use, etc. affect
wildlife in the
City? 166 sampling sites – assessing birds, butterflies, and
vegetation
12
Painted Lady
INITIAL FINDINGS:
33 species of butterflies
88 species of birds
Western Tanager
INVENTORY AND ASSESSMENT:
ENVIRONMENTAL
13
INVENTORY AND ASSESSMENT:
ENVIRONMENTAL
INITIAL FINDINGS
• Land use is a strong driver for species
diversity
# of species
0
10
20
30
40
birds butterflies
14
INVENTORY AND ASSESSMENT:
ENVIRONMENTAL
INITIAL FINDINGS
• Land use also affects types of birds observed
0%
20%
40%
60%
80%
100%
urban avoiders neutral urban adapted
15
PRIORITIES IDENTIFIED
(TO DATE)
• Continue current policies
• Connectivity – people and wildlife
• Access to nature (10-minute walk)
• Increase wildlife habitat
• Irrigation Ditches
• Seek incentives for new and
existing developments
• Urban agriculture
• Coordinate with Climate Action
Plan efforts
• Mowing/weed control policies
PHASE 2: DEVELOP
STRATEGIC PLAN
10 minute walking distance (orange) to public lands
(green)
16
• Demonstration
Project(s)
• Living Wall
(Spring 2015)
• Design guidelines
• Incentives for
redeveloping
existing sites
• Land Use Code
changes
PHASE 3:
IMPLEMENT
ACTION ITEMS
Top: Chirpchick
Bottom: Living Wall Concept Design
17
PROJECT OUTREACH
• Outreach Conducted to Date
• Six Boards and Commissions
• Citizens Advisory Committee
• Over 1,000 residents engaged via project
survey
• Targeted outreach to the Business
Community
• Extensive partnerships with CSU and
Poudre School District
• Upcoming Engagement Efforts
• Super Issue Meeting (Boards and
Commissions) – Oct 27
• Visual Preference Survey (Nov)
• Focus group with environmental
organizations (Winter ‘15)
• Online survey and draft plan will be
available for review (Winter ‘15)
18
PHOTO CONTEST
Photo Credits:
Top: Boxcar Oscar (Far Left); Fresh Air Fort Collins (Left); John Bartholow (Right); Paul Avery (Far Right)
Bottom: John Bartholow (Far Left); Michelle Finchum (Left); Ava Diamond (Right); Carol Evans (Right)
19
NEXT STEPS
• Phase 1: Inventory and
Assessment
§ Complete Environmental
Analysis (Dec ‘14)
• Phase 2: Strategic Plan
§ Revise list of
issues/policies
§ Draft Plan (Nov ‘14 – Jan
‘15)
§ Council Adoption (Early
Spring ‘15)
• Phase 3: Implementation
§ Design Guidelines (Nov – May
‘15)
§ Design the green wall (May
Photo Credits:
Top: John Bartholow
Bottom: Molly Rosey
20
QUESTIONS FOR COUNCIL
1.What is Council’s feedback on
the results from Inventory and
Assessment (Phase One)?
2.Is the project headed in the
direction Council expected? Are
there additional questions or
thoughts Council would suggest
staff explore?
21
City Council Work Session
Bruce Hendee, Lindsay Ex
October 28, 2014
NATURE IN THE
CITY
• Opportunities for businesses to get on board with this topic –
get publicity for this topic and attract people to the business
• As redevelopment occurs, opportunity to increase access to
nature, and we could be a demonstration of what’s possible
• More progressive legal strategies, other tools in our
conservation toolbox
• Create the processes for collaborations to occur, e.g., Prospect
and Timberline or residences
• Incentivize residential landscaping as opposed to regulating it,
shift landscape aesthetic
• Encourage volunteerism through incentives
• Honor and recognize competing missions – find a way to
support them both
• Development can often be the catalyst for environmental
protection (e.g.,bring $$ to a restoration project) . Use
developers and development as partners and resources for
certain efforts.
• More public revenue to support these efforts, e.g., fees,
general fund, successful tax initiatives
OPPORTUNITIES:
• Partnerships with PSD and CSU, provide kids to access,
ensure 10 minute walk to schools – environmental
awareness/education
• Opportunities for public/private partnerships in building,
maintaining, etc.
• Look differently at our public infrastructure to utilize
spaces for natural environments, e.g., street right-of-way,
serve as corridors for nature
• Increase distribution of native plants across the
environment,
• Producing native seeds that can proliferate, native seed
source in Fort Collins
• Improved air and water quality with more natural systems
• Encourage desirable species and to discourage
undesirable species
• Revisit policies to obtain alignment
• As redevelopment occurs, opportunity to increase access
to nature, and we could be a demonstration of what’s
possible
• More progressive legal strategies, other tools in our
conservation toolbox
• Create the processes for collaborations to occur, e.g.,
Prospect and Timberline or residences
• Bring in the irrigation ditch system
• Incentivize residential landscaping as opposed to
regulating it, shift landscape aesthetic
• Encourage volunteerism through incentives
• Honor and recognize competing missions – find a way to
support them both
• Improves habitat through increased biodiversity
• Improve connections between larger habitat areas
• Greater access to the environment – create more
chances for positive interactions, better stewardship of
nature and the environment
• Opportunity to improve air quality, night skies, GHG
storage and lower emissions
• Improve ecosystem services, such as water filtration,
pollination, cooling, etc.
• Biodiversity help our community better prepare for climate
change.
Form Completed January 2014 This form is based on research by the City of Olympia and Evergreen State College
LIMITATIONS
• As land redevelops, how do we still accommodate
nature/natural amenities?
• Need to understand the bottom line impacts/breaking point of
these types of efforts , e.g., not feasible to build a project and
affordability is impacted
• Existing policies may not be in alignment with this project’s
vision
• Existing ditch system structure not conducive to multi-
functional use of land
• Private property concerns, government involvement and how
far we go with regulating this
• Increased maintenance and enforcement costs, diluted efforts
may arise
• Increased costs to private developers may not be well received
especially on in-fill or re-development sites
LIMITATIONS:
• Availability of land
• Access to land, private access concerns
• Existing policies may not be in alignment with this project’s
vision
• Existing ditch system structure not conducive to multi-
functional use of land
• People not wanting to “share” their area – limited access
• Informal areas may not exist in gaps
• Increased maintenance costs, diluted efforts may arise
• Defining nature is difficult, which could make establishing a
baseline experience difficult, e.g., how do we convey that a
“poor quality area” from an ecological perspective still has
value?
Form Completed January 2014 This form is based on research by the City of Olympia and Evergreen State College
e. 45-54
f. 55-64
g. 65-74
h. 75+
i. Prefer not to answer
18) Is there anything else you would like to add?
_________________________________
_________________________________
_________________________________
_________________________________
_________________________________
_________________________________
19) Would you like to join our email list?
Email: ____________________________
Please return this survey to Lindsay Ex via email at
lex@fcgov.com
Or mail to the following address:
Lindsay Ex, City of Fort Collins
PO Box 580
Fort Collins, CO 80522
15 NATURE IN THE CITY SURVEY – UPDATED JUNE 3, 2014
i. Lack of public transit or other
transportation
j. Lack of time
k. Other ______________________
8) Why do you choose to spend time in nature?
(rank top 3 reasons in order)
___ Escape from urban environment/
Fresh Air
___ Wildlife (intrinsic value or viewing),
Plants, Trees
___ Personal exercise or play
___ Family/group exercise or play
___ Convenience/It’s Close to Home
___ To Experience Beauty, Peace, or feel
Rejuvenated
___ To be Close to or Enjoy Water
___ To Walk My Dog/Pet
___ Wide Open Spaces
___ Other ______________________
9) Which of these values are most important in your
neighborhood to you? (rank top 3 values in order)
___ Escape from urban environment/
Fresh Air
___ Wildlife (intrinsic value or viewing),
Plants, Trees
___ Personal exercise or play
___ Family exercise or play
___ Convenience/It’s Close to Home
___ To Experience Beauty, Peace, or feel
Rejuvenated
___ To be Close to or Enjoy Water
___ To Walk My Dog/Pet
___ Wide Open Spaces
___ Other ______________________
14 NATURE IN THE CITY SURVEY – UPDATED JUNE 3, 2014
Escape from
the Urban
Environment
Wildlife,
Plants,
Trees
Family/group
exercise or
play
To
Experience
Beauty,
Peace or
feel
Rejuvenated
Escape from
the Urban
Environment
& To
Experience
Beauty,
Peace or
Feel
Rejuvenated
Escape from
the Urban
Environment
& To
Experience
Beauty,
Peace or
Feel
Rejuvenated
To Experience
Beauty, Peace
or feel
Rejuvenated
Wide
Open
Spaces
Third
Priority
To
Experience
Beauty,
Peace or
feel
Rejuvenated
& Wide
Open
Spaces
To
Experience
Beauty,
Peace or
feel
Rejuvenated
Personal
exercise or
play & To
Experience
Beauty,
Peace or
feel
Rejuvenated
Family/group
exercise or
play
Wide Open
Spaces
Personal
exercise or
play
Escape from
the Urban
Environment
13 NATURE IN THE CITY – OUTREACH SUMMARY – UPDATED SEPTEMBER 2014
Trees
Wildlife,
Plants, Trees
& Family
Exercise or
Play
Wildlife, Plants and
Trees and To Walk
my Dog/Pet
Wildlife, Plants, and
Trees & To
Experience Beauty,
Peace or feel
Rejuvenated
Third
Priority
To Experience
Beauty, Peace
or feel
Rejuvenated
To Experience
Beauty, Peace
or feel
Rejuvenated
Wildlife,
Plants, Trees
To Experience
Beauty, Peace
or feel
Rejuvenated
To Experience
Beauty, Peace
or feel
Rejuvenated
Personal exercise or
play; Family exercise
or play; and
Convenience/It’s
Close to Home
Analysis: How do project priorities compare across races?
Given the small number of respondents of different races, this analysis was not conducted for all races. However, as 5% of respondents were
Hispanic, the priorities for Hispanic respondents are as follows: (1) To Escape from the Urban Environment & to Experience Beauty, Peace or Feel
Rejuvenated; (2) Personal Exercise or Play; and (3) Convenience/It’s close to home. White respondents’ priorities were consistent with the overall
survey: (1) To Escape from the Urban Environment; (2) Wildlife, Plants, and Trees, and (3) To Experience Beauty, Peace or Feel Rejuvenated.
10 NATURE IN THE CITY – OUTREACH SUMMARY – UPDATED SEPTEMBER 2014
more
3%
35-44
21%
18-24
19%
25-34
17%
45-54
10%
55-64
10%
Under 18
9%
65-74
7% 75+
7%
Prefer not to
answer
0%
• Residents access nature within the
community primarily for personal recreation
or exercise; to escape from the urban
environment; and to observe wildlife, plants
and trees.
• When asked what this project should focus
on, given our current strengths and
weaknesses, four priorities emerged:
1. Provide opportunities to escape from
the urban environment
2. Increase connectivity and opportunities
for wildlife and plants (especially trees)
to thrive in the community
3. Provide places to find beauty, peace,
and relaxation
4. Provide more opportunities for personal
and group exercise or play, with an
emphasis on a connected network of
these opportunities.
1 NATURE IN THE CITY – SURVEY SUMMARY – UPDATED OCTOBER 2014
importance of education and the need to instill an
appreciation for nature into our children.
Finally, there was a generally agreed upon need
to provide additional clarity around open space
requirements in multi-family (or apartment) style
developments. Many residents expressed
concerns about the lack of open space in
recently approved developments.
WikiMap
Wikimaps are online, editable maps where
participants can provide feedback on specific
questions. In this exercise, respondents
identified where they access nature within the
City and where barriers to accessing nature
were.
These results will be available at the beginning of
October on the project’s webpage at
www.fcgov.com/natureinthecity.
4 NATURE IN THE CITY – OUTREACH SUMMARY – UPDATED SEPTEMBER 2014
• Chamber Local Legislative Affairs Commission
• Fort Collins Board of Realtors
• Fort Collins Museum of Discovery
• NoCo Economic Development Commission
• Drake Road Farmers Market
• Convention and Visitors Bureau
• Built Environment Work Group
• Video – Project Overview on Full Circle show
• Fort Collins Housing Authority Property
• Common Ground Food School
• IBMC
• Teaching Tree Early Childhood Center
• South Fort Collins Business Assoc.
• North Fort Collins Business Assoc.
• Riversong School
• La Familia
• Rocky Mountain High School
• Partnership with CSU Senior-Level Wildlife
Management Class
• Video “Nature in the City: What does this project
mean to you”
• Larimer County Farmers Market
• Sustainable Living Fair
1 NATURE IN THE CITY – OUTREACH SUMMARY – UPDATED SEPTEMBER 2014