HomeMy WebLinkAboutCOUNCIL - COMPLETE AGENDA - 04/26/2016 - COMPLETE AGENDA City of •
F6rt Collins AGENDA
Wade Troxell , Mayor City Council Chambers
Gerry Horak , District 6 , Mayor Pro Tem City Hall West
Bob Overbeck , District 1 300 LaPorte Avenue
Ray Martinez , District 2 Fort Collins , Colorado
Gino Campana , District 3
Kristin Stephens , District 4 Cablecast on City Cable Channel 14
Ross Cunniff, District 5 and Channel 881 on the Comcast cable system
Carrie Daggett Darin Atteberry Wanda Winkelmann
City Attorney City Manager City Clerk
The City of Fort Collins will make reasonable accommodations for access to City services , programs, and activities
and will make special communication arrangements for persons with disabilities. Please call 221 -6515 (V/TDD : Dial
711 for Relay Colorado) for assistance .
Special Meeting
April 26 , 2016
6 : 00 p . m .
• PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
• CALL TO ORDER
• ROLL CALL
• CITIZEN PARTICIPATION
City of Fort Collins Page 1
Individuals may comment regarding items scheduled on the Consent Calendar and items not
specifically scheduled on the agenda . Comments regarding land use projects for which a development
application has been filed should be submitted in the development review process** and not to the
Council .
• Those who wish to speak are asked to sign in at the table in the lobby (for recordkeeping
purposes ) .
• All speakers will be asked by the presiding officer to identify themselves by raising their hand ,
and then will be asked to move to one of the two lines of speakers (or to a seat nearby, for
those who are not able to stand while waiting ) .
• The presiding officer will determine and announce the length of time allowed for each speaker.
• Each speaker will be asked to state his or her name and general address for the record , and to
keep comments brief. Any written comments or materials intended for the Council should be
provided to the City Clerk .
• A timer will beep once and the timer light will turn yellow to indicate that 30 seconds of
speaking time remain , and will beep again and turn red when a speaker' s time to speak has
ended .
[**For questions about the development review process or the status of any particular development,
citizens should consult the Development Review Center page on the City website at
fcgov. com/developmentreview, or contact the Development Review Center at 221 -6750 .]
• CITIZEN PARTICIPATION FOLLOW-UP
Discussion Items
The method of debate for discussion items is as follows :
• Mayor introduces the item number, and subject; asks if formal presentation will be
made by staff
• Staff presentation (optional )
• Mayor requests citizen comment on the item (three minute limit for each citizen )
• Council questions of staff on the item
• Council motion on the item
• Council discussion
• Final Council comments
• Council vote on the item
Note : Time limits for individual agenda items may be revised , at the discretion of the Mayor, to ensure
all citizens have an opportunity to speak. Please sign in at the table in the back of the room .
The timer will buzz when there are 30 seconds left and the light will turn yellow. It will buzz again
at the end of the speaker's time .
1 . Resolution 2016-038 Making Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law Regarding the Appeal of the
March 7 , 2016 , Building Review Board Decision on Remand Regarding the Coy-Hoffman Silos , 1041
Woodward Way.
The purpose of this item is to make Findings of Fact and Conclusions of law regarding the appeal of
the Building Review Board ( BRB ) March 7 , 2016 , decision upon remand to uphold the Chief Building
Official ' s declaration that the two historic farm silos located at 1041 Woodward Way are "dangerous
structures" and not structures that pose an " imminent danger" (also referred to as " imminent threat" ) .
The appeal was heard by City Council on April 19 , 2016 ,
City of Fort Collins Page 2
• OTHER BUSINESS
A. Possible consideration of the initiation of new ordinances and/or resolutions by Councilmembers .
(Three or more individual Councilmembers may direct the City Manager and City Attorney to initiate
and move forward with development and preparation of resolutions and ordinances not originating
from the Council's Policy Agenda or initiated by staff. )
• ADJOURNMENT
City of Fort Collins Page 3
Agenda Item 1
AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY April 26 , 2016
City Council
STAFF
Mike Gebo , Chief Building Official
Laurie Kadrich , Director of PDT
SUBJECT
Resolution 2016-038 Making Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law Regarding the Appeal of the March 7 ,
2016 , Building Review Board Decision on Remand Regarding the Coy- Hoffman Silos , 1041 Woodward Way.
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
The purpose of this item is to make Findings of Fact and Conclusions of law regarding the appeal of the
Building Review Board ( BRB) March 7 , 2016 , decision upon remand to uphold the Chief Building Official ' s
declaration that the two historic farm silos located at 1041 Woodward Way are "dangerous structures" and not
structures that pose an " imminent danger" (also referred to as " imminent threat" ) . The appeal was heard by
City Council on April 19 , 2016 ,
STAFF RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends adoption of the Resolution
BACKGROUND / DISCUSSION
On September 18 , 2015 , the Chief Building Official determined that the two historic silos on Woodward , Inc . ,
property at 1041 Woodward Way were "dangerous structures , " but not an " imminent danger. "
On September 28 , 2015 , Woodward filed an appeal of the building official's determination to the BRB , stating
that the silos should have been declared an "imminent danger. "
On October 29 , 2015 , the BRB heard Woodward 's appeal . The BRB upheld the building official's determination
that the silos were "dangerous , " but not an " imminent danger. "
On November 12 , 2015 , Woodward appealed the BRB's decision to Council on the grounds that the BRB
failed to properly interpret and apply relevant provisions of the City Code .
On January 19 , 2016 , City Council heard the appeal . Based on the evidence in the record and presented at the
Council Hearing , and pursuant to City Code Section 2 -55(f)(2 ) , Council remanded the matter to the BRB for
rehearing . On remand , the BRB was directed to receive and consider evidence and analysis regarding the
effects of natural conditions and events of a one in ten -year probability on one or both of the silos to consider
whether one or both silos pose an imminent threat or danger as that term is defined in the International
Property Maintenance Code . This direction was set forth in City Council Resolution 2016 -009 .
On March 7 , 2016 , the BRB heard Woodward 's appeal . The BRB received and considered evidence and
analysis that indicated that wind would be the natural condition that would have the greatest impact upon the
silos . The BRB upon remand rendered a decision to uphold the determination of the Chief Building Official that
the silos are "dangerous" and not an " imminent danger. "
Item # 1 Page 1
Packet Pg . 4
Agenda Item 1
On March 21 , 2016 , Woodward appealed the BRB's March 7 , 2016 , decision to uphold the Chief Building
Officials determination asserting that the BRB failed to properly interpret and apply the City Code .
On April 19 , 20165 City Council heard the appeal of the March 7 , 2016 , BRB decision . City Council overturned
the Building Review Board ' s decision by a 5-2 vote ( Nays : Cunniff, Overbeck) and determined that the silos
were an imminent danger.
Additional background can be found in the AIS for the April 19 , 20167 appeal attached hereto . ( Attachment 1 )
ATTACHMENTS
1 . Appeal Agenda Item Summary, April 19 , 2016 (w/o attachments ) ( PDF )
Item # 1 Page 2
Packet Pg , 5
ATTACHMENT 1 1 . 1
Agenda Item 14
AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY April 19 , 2016
City Council
STAFF =
ii
Mike Gebo , Chief Building Official a
Laurie Kadrich , Director of PDT C
N
O
SUBJECT Cn
�a
Consideration of an Appeal of the Building Review Board 's March 7 , 2016 , Decision Regarding the Coy- E
Hoffman Silos , 1041 Woodward Way . _
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY O
U
Woodward , Inc . (Woodward ) is appealing the Building Review Board 's ( BRB ) decision , on remand from a c°'o
January 19 , 2016 appeal , to uphold the Chief Building Official ' s determination that two historic farm silos ,
located at 1041 Woodward Way, are "dangerous structures" and not structures that pose an " imminent
danger. " _
m
BACKGROUND I DISCUSSION
�a
Woodward 's new facility and office complex on 1041 Woodward Way, corner of South Lemay Avenue and
East Lincoln Avenue , was the original site of the Coy- Hoffman farmstead , a state designated historical site . A
barn , milkhouse , and two silos are what remain of the farmstead . The two silos are showing signs of concrete 3
decay around their bases . The cast in place silo has a slight list to the east and is out of plumb . The stave c
system silo is oblong at the upper third . N
ai
TM
Woodward appealed to Council , the Building Review Board 's ( BRB ) first decision of October 29 , 2015 , to
uphold the Building Official 's declaration that the silos are "dangerous" but not an " imminent danger" as defined C
in the adopted 2006 International Property Maintenance Code (IPMC) which states :
L
" Imminent Danger, a condition which could cause serious or life-threatening injury or death at any E
time. " E
Cn
On January 19 , 2016 , Council heard Woodward 's appeal and remanded the issue back to the BRB in E
Resolution 2016-009 Section 3 which states :
�a
Section 3. That based on the evidence in the record and presented at the Council Hearing, and
pursuant to City Code Section 2-55(0 (2), the matter shall be remanded to the BRB to receive and Q
consider evidence and analysis regarding the effects of natural conditions and events of a one in ten-
year probability on one or both of the silos to consider whether one or both poses an imminent threat m
or danger as that term is defined in the International Property Maintenance Code. " Q
On March 7 , 2016 , the BRB reheard the case as directed by Council . c
m
E
Engineer's reports
�a
Both Woodward ' s engineer, JVA, represented by Mr. Steve Carpenter, and the City' s engineer, Exponent, Q
represented by Mr. Paul Bennett, evaluated the effects of natural conditions upon the silos , including wind ,
snow, hail , rain , seismic or vibrations . Both engineers concluded that of the natural events reviewed , wind
Item # 14 Page 1
Packet Pg . 6
1 . 1
Agenda Item 14
would have the greatest impact on the silos and evaluated the silos using a one in ten-year wind event,
calculated to be winds of 85-90 mph . Both engineers agree that the stave silo is of more concern than the cast-
in-place silo .
The JVA report, updated on March 1 , 2016 , from Mr. Carpenter, concludes that based on analysis and a�
calculations , both silos could fail under loading associated with an 85-90 mph wind event . The Exponent First =
Supplemental Report from Mr. Bennett, performed calculations and included in its evaluation the silo's =_
performance in recent wind events as recorded by Colorado State University. Mr. Bennett indicated that the
last time winds were recorded on the order of 85 mph was 1999 , when a gust of 83 mph was recorded . Mr. (D
Bennett concluded that the silos that resisted 80+ mph winds in 1999 are likely to resist the wind effects of 85- a
90 mph in their current condition . Q
N
O
Dangerous vs Imminent Cn
�a
Council directed that the definition of imminent, as provided for in the adopted IPMC , shall be used in E
determining the silo's correct classification . The building official has classified the silos as dangerous c
structures . _
O
Building code language can be confusing when taken out of context or when not evaluated against other terms �?
used in that Code . To better understand the code intent of imminent , other terms of the IPMC are presented ;
M
• 108, 1 , 1 Substandard structures. A substandard structure is one that may pose a risk to
the life, health, property or safety of the occupants thereof or the public, even though it Y
does not constitute a dangerous structure as defined in Section 108. 1 . 5, either because =
m
the structure lacks the equipment necessary to protect or warn occupants in the event of E
fire, or because it contains substandard or missing equipment, systems or fixtures, or is
damaged, decayed, dilapidated, or structurally unsound. 14
Under the IPMC , substandard is considered the lowest level hazard of a structure and O
3
references that the structure does not constitute a dangerous structure .
0
• 108. 1 . 5 Dangerous structure or premises. A structure or premises is dangerous if any N
part, element or component thereof is no longer within its serviceability limit or strengthTOM
Q'
limit state as defined in this code or, when considered in totality, the structure or premises
pose an imminent threat to the health and safety of the public or the occupants of the a
structure or premises. Q
L
M
Dangerous , as written in Section 108 . 1 . 5 of the IPMC , identifies a higher level of hazard from E
"substandard " and the text would appear to place an even higher degree of hazard when E
describing imminent threat . Cn
E
W
• Chapter 2 Definitions; Imminent Danger. A condition which could cause serious or life- =
threatening injury or death at any time.
m
When interpreted in context to other terms in the IPMC , imminent danger takes on an °1
immediacy not stated or indicated in either the substandard or dangerous references . It is
Q
understood that any dangerous structure which is no longer within its serviceability limit or m
a
strength limit state could have a condition which could cause a serious or life-threatening a
injury or death , the key to imminent is the perceived immediacy of the hazard as stated as at Q
any time . _
m
E
Conclusion
�a
The Building Official has determined that the Woodward silos are dangerous structures ; however an imminent Q
danger has not been established . Woodward has argued that the silos could cause serious or life-threatening
injury or death when wind forces of 85-90 mph are applied . The BRB , on remand , has ruled to uphold the
Item # 14 Page 2
Packet Pg . 7
1 . 1
Agenda Item 14
building official 's declaration that the silos are dangerous and not imminent.
Woodward has been ordered to provide to the City a "plan of protection" and to stabilize and repair the silos so
as to abate the hazard and remove the dangerous classification . N
a�
ATTACHMENTS
1 . City Clerk's Public Hearing Notice ( PDF)
2 . Notice of Appeal , March 21 , 2016 ( PDF ) a
3 . Materials Provided to the Building Review Board ( PDF) Q-
4 . Staff presentation to Building Review Board ( PDF ) y
5 . Applicant presentation to Building Review Board ( PDF ) c
6 . Paul Bennett, Exponent, presentation to Building Review Board ( PDF ) y
7 . Exhibits presented at Building Review Board Hearing ( PDF )
8 . Verbatim transcript ( PDF ) E
9 . Staff presentation to Council ( PDF )
O
U
m
M
N
_
d
E
L
C�
O
3
v
r
TOM
N
'i
CL
a
L
M
E
E
Cn
E
a
CL
CL
a
E
a
Item # 14 Page 3
Packet Pg . 8
RESOLUTION 2016-038
OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FORT COLLINS
MAKING FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW REGARDING THE
APPEAL OF THE MARCH 7, 2016, BUILDING REVIEW BOARD DECISION ON
REMAND REGARDING THE COY-HOFFMAN SILOS , 1041 WOODWARD WAY
WHEREAS, Woodward, Inc . , ("Woodward") is the owner of two silos (the "Silos")
located on its property within municipal limits at 1041 Woodward Way; and
WHEREAS , on September 18 , 2015 , the City of Fort Collins Chief Building Official (the
"CBO") issued his determination that the Silos were dangerous but not imminently dangerous ;
and
WHEREAS, Woodward appealed the September 18, 2015 , CBO determination to the
City of Fort Collins Building Review Board (the "BRB") ; and
WHEREAS, on October 29 , 2015 , the BRB heard the appeal and adopted a motion
upholding the CBO ' s September 18 , 2015 , determination; and
WHEREAS, Woodward appealed the October 29, 2015 , BRB decision to the City
Council; and
WHEREAS , on January 19, 2016, the City Council heard the appeal and remanded the
matter for further BRB consideration with direction as stated in Council Resolution 2016 -009 ;
and
WHEREAS, on March 7, 2016, the BRB heard the appeal on remand and adopted a
motion upholding the CBO ' s September 18 , 2015 , determination; and
WHEREAS , Woodward appealed the March 7 , 2016 , BRB decision to the City Council
by filing its Notice of Appeal on March 21 , 2016 ; and
WHEREAS , the Notice of Appeal claimed that the BRB failed to properly interpret and
apply the City Code in making its decision at the March 7 , 2016 , remand hearing; and
WHEREAS , on April 19, 2016, the City Council, after notice given in accordance with
Chapter 2, Article I1, Division 3 , of the City Code, considered the Appeal, reviewed the record
on appeal and the applicable City Code provisions, and heard presentations from the
representatives for Woodward and the parties-in-interest opposed to the Appeal (the "Council
Hearing") ; and
WHEREAS, the evidence for City Council consideration at the Council Hearing
consisted of the evidence presented at the Council Hearing plus the evidence contained in the
records of the October 29, 2015 , and March 7, 20165 BRB hearings, and the January 19 , 2016,
Council hearing; and
- 1 -
Packet Pg . 9
WHEREAS, after discussion, the City Council found and concluded based on the
evidence in the record and presented at the Council Hearing that:
I . The BRB failed to properly interpret and apply the City Council direction on remand
regarding the consideration of the effect of natural conditions and events of a one -in-
ten year probability on the Silos ; and
2 . The BRB failed to properly interpret and apply the term "imminent danger" as such
term is defined in IPMC Section 202, adopted pursuant to City Code Section 5 -46,
and City Code Section 5 -47( 12) ; and
3 . The evidence established that the Silos are an "imminent danger" as such term is
defined in the City Code ; and
4. The Silos pose an imminent threat to life, health, and property; and
5 . The BRB decision to uphold the September 18 , 2015 , CBO determination is
overturned.
WHEREAS , City Code Section 2-55 (g) provides that no later than the date of its next
regular meeting after the hearing of an appeal, City Council shall adopt, by resolution, findings
of fact in support of its decision on the Appeal.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
FORT COLLINS that, pursuant to Section 2-55(g) of the City Code, the City Council hereby
makes and adopts the following findings of fact and conclusions :
Section 1 . That the grounds for appeal as stated in the Notice of Appeal conform to
the requirements of Section 2-48 of the City Code.
Section 2 . That based on the evidence in the record and presented at the Council
Hearing, the recitals set forth above are adopted as findings of fact.
Section 3 . That the BRB failed to properly interpret and apply the City Code at the
March 7, 2016, remand hearing.
Section 4 . That the BRB decision to uphold the September 18 , 2015 , CBO
determination is overturned.
Section 5 . That the Silos are an "imminent danger" as such term is defined in the
City Code and pose an imminent threat to life, health, and property
Section 6 . That the CBO is directed to forthwith issue an order to Woodward to
demolish or repair the Silos on the basis that the Silos are an imminent threat to life, health, and
property.
-2-
Packet Pg . 10
Section 7 . That adoption of this Resolution shall constitute the final action of the City
Council in accordance with City Code Section 2-55 (g) .
Passed and adopted at a special meeting of the Council of the City of Fort Collins this
26th day of April, A.D . 2016 .
Mayor
ATTEST :
City Clerk
- 3 -
Packet Pg . 11
City of •
F6rt Collins
AGENDA
Wade Troxell , Mayor Council Information Center (CIC )
Gerry Horak , District 6 , Mayor Pro Tern City Hall West
Bob Overbeck, District 1 300 LaPorte Avenue
Ray Martinez, District 2 Fort Collins , Colorado
Gino Campana , District 3
Kristin Stephens , District 4 Cablecast on City Cable Channel 14
Ross Cunniff, District 5 and Channel 881 on the Comcast cable system
Carrie Daggett Darin Atteberry Wanda Winkelmann
City Attorney City Manager City Clerk
The City of Fort Collins will make reasonable accommodations for access to City services , programs , and activities
and will make special communication arrangements for persons with disabilities. Please call 221 -6515 (TDD 224-
6001 ) for assistance .
City Council Work Session
April 26 , 2016
After the Special Meeting , which begins at 6 : 00 p . m .
• CALL TO ORDER.
1 . Broadband Strategic Plan Update- Market Demand Overview. (staff: Seonah Kendall , Mike
Beckstead ; 15 minute staff presentation ; 1 hour discussion )
The purpose of this item is to provide City Council an update on the Broadband Strategic Plan and
review the recent findings of the Broadband Market Demand Study, formation of the Broadband
Citizen Committee and Expert Review Committee , and next steps .
2 . Mountain Vista Area Open Lands Preservation Scenario . (staff: Cameron Gloss ; 10 minute staff
presentation ; 45 minute discussion )
The purpose of this item is to evaluate an open land preservation scenario for the Mountain Vista
area that maintains the area 's overall projected jobs and housing , but configures future development
patterns to conserve more land for local food production , access to nature , and innovative housing
opportunities .
3 . Refreshing Fort Collins Parks . (staff: Kurt Friesen , Mike Calhoon ; 10 minute staff presentation ; 1
hour discussion )
The purpose of this item is to inform Council about refreshing Fort Collins parks . Fort Collins parks
are aging and in need of improvements in order for them to adequately meet the growing demands
of today' s users . Currently, there are two programs in place for construction and infrastructure
replacement in parks , the park build-out and park life cycle programs . These programs provide
funding for construction of new parks in the city and replacement or restoration of existing park
components . Both of these programs have inadequate funding . Currently there is not a program in
place for adapting parks to meet the changing needs of park users . There are numerous reasons to
City of Fort Collins Page 1
refresh parks . These include keeping pace with changing trends in recreation , adapting to changing
community needs , providing equitable park experiences city wide , connecting people with nature ,
and replacing and improving antiquated infrastructure.
A proposed process for refreshing parks has been identified , and is currently being implemented at
City Park. The steps for this process include project goal identification , preparation of initial concepts ,
gathering community input, master plan development, phase I project identification , and phased
construction based on available funding . The focus of the park refresh program should be on
community parks , as these typically are more programmed than neighborhood parks . It is estimated
that approximately 50 million dollars are needed to refresh 4 aging community parks . There are
numerous benefits to parks , including economic benefits as illustrated by studies completed by the
National Recreation and Parks Association and Trust for Public Land .
• OTHER BUSINESS ,
• ADJOURNMENT,
City of Fort Collins Page 2
DATE : April 26 , 2016
STAFF : Seonah Kendall , Economic Policy & Project Manager WORK SESSION ITEM
Mike Beckstead , Chief Financial Officer City Council
SUBJECT FOR DISCUSSION
Broadband Strategic Plan Update-Market Demand Overview.
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
The purpose of this item is to provide City Council an update on the Broadband Strategic Plan and review the
recent findings of the Broadband Market Demand Study, formation of the Broadband Citizen Committee and
Expert Review Committee , and next steps .
GENERAL DIRECTION SOUGHT AND SPECIFIC QUESTIONS TO BE ANSWERED
This is a Broadband progress report, which will overview the recently completed market demand study and
provides Council with an update on the plan for 2016 .
BACKGROUND / DISCUSSION
On November 3 , 2015 , 83% of Fort Collins voters supported Ballot Issue 2B , which overturned Senate Bill 05 -
152 , removing legal barriers for the City's involvement, direct or indirect, in providing telecommunication services .
This vote allows the City and citizens to consider and pursue the best decisions based on the needs and desires
of the community. It is important to note that the November election did not commit the City to providing
broadband services in Fort Collins , nor does it mean that such services would be available immediately.
Additionally, in late 2015 , the City of Fort Collins engaged Uptown Services LLC , a Colorado consulting firm , to
provide six deliverables related to the City's exploration of broadband services :
• Asset Report and Map(s )
• Broadband Service Market Demand Report
• Target Broadband Standards Report
• Feasibility Analysis - by business model
• Strategic , Financial , Operational and Technological Risk and Opportunities Report - by business model
• Broadband Strategic Plan Synopsis and Recommendation Report
This update will focus on the recently completed market demand study and the implications to the financial
feasibility analysis and overall broadband plan .
Fort Collins Market Demand Study
In March 2016 , Uptown Services completed three market segment ( residential , small business , large
business/institutional ) studies to identify unique needs (services) by sector of population and/or geographical
areas , and estimate demand and take- rate (i . e . , potential subscribership rate ) assumptions by sector. The market
research results will contribute to the feasibility analysis as inputs to model development. The methodology and
research parameters used for the Fort Collins Market Demand Study include :
Packet Pg . 3
April 26 , 2016 Page 2
Market Research Research Parameters
Segment Methodology
. Sample size of 400 : . ith 95 % Confidence Interval . . ith a t 4 . 9 sample
error
Residential . Weighted by age decile to Fort Collins actual age distribution from
Consumers Quantitative 2010 Census data
Phone . Screened for telecom ;'broadband decision maker and employment
Surveys bias
• Sample size of 50 :vith 95110 Confidence Interval . ith a t 4 . 9 sample
Small and error
Medium Sized . Screened for telecomibroadband decision maker and employment
Businesses bias
• Located within the city limits and not home- based
• Has internet
Large . Responses aggregated for confidentiality
Employers Qualitative . Evaluate the current and future demand and need of the commercial
and Depth and institutional segment
Institutional Interviev., . Qualify interest and level of support for the development and
Partners implementation of fiber broadband infrastructure
Market Demand Study Findings - Residential Survey
The residential market demand survey asks questions around Internet, voice and video services as part of the
overall inputs for the financial feasibility analysis . A high speed Internet service is the primary focus of the
broadband study, but the appeal of bundling services at a minimal cost is being investigated . The study
confirmed that almost all Fort Collins households use the Internet . Governing . com 's "America's Most Connected
Cities" stated that 91 .4% of Fort Collins residents have at least one wired connection . Ninety-nine percent of Fort
Collins households surveyed use Internet at home . Of these connected homes , cable modem and digital
subscriber lines (DSL ) have the vast majority of the market share at 94% . Additionally, the study indicated that
Internet usage is prevalent across all income and age groups .
Questions around customer service satisfaction levels were also surveyed , as this plays a role in the market
demand for alternative broadband services . Respondents were asked to rank customer satisfaction from a scale
of 1 - 10 , with 10 being "totally satisfied " and 1 being " not at all satisfied , " by service categories : cable television ,
satellite television , non- pay television ( i . e . , antenna , basic channels ) , DSL , cable modem , telephone and electric
utility. The average customer satisfaction was high for electric utility at a mean rating of 8 . 7 , while the average
mean for DSL was 6 . 8 and cable modem was 6 . 6 . Sixty-four percent of the respondents rated the City's Utility
brand a 9 or 10 rating . Other internet services had significantly lower customer service satisfaction selection of 9
or 10 ratings .
Lower prices , increased Internet speed and reliability dominate the wish list of service improvements respondents
identified for broadband . Branding and bundling were secondary in importance . Additionally, 81 % of respondents
acknowledged the importance of having low cost, high -speed Internet.
In addition to questions about current broadband services , market share and customer service satisfaction , the
broadband market demand survey asked respondents about their interest and purchase intent (willingness to
switch ) for broadband services , if offered by an alternative fiber network provider. Seventy percent of
respondents would definitely or probably switch to the fiber network for Internet services . Furthermore , if
respondents answered `definitely' or ` probably' switch to the fiber network for Internet services , they were asked
the reason for the switch . The top three reasons given by respondents for a switch were : need for higher
capacity, lower prices and the City as a preferred provider. Among the list of potential providers , 45% of
respondents stated the City as the preferred provider, most likely due to brand recognition and customer service
reputation . Notably, the City as a preferred provider, as well as purchase intent, ranked higher among younger
households (20-34 years of age ) .
Packet Pg . 4
April 26 , 2016 Page 3
Market Demand Study Findings - Small to Mid -Size Business Survey
A similar survey was deployed to the small -to- mid-size business (SMB) segment. The survey found that Comcast
and CenturyLink are the only two Internet Service Providers ( ISPs ) with SMB market share in Fort Collins (about
96% of respondents) . Two-thirds of SMB respondents in Fort Collins are under contract for their Internet and
voice services . Additionally, SMB respondents had similar responses to the residential respondents in regard to
customer satisfaction by service and customer needs . One item to note is that SMBs put a larger emphasis on
the need for improved reliability, most likely due to reliance on technology and the Internet for business
operations .
Market Demand Study Findings - Large Business/Institution Qualitative Survey
The objective of the large business/institution qualitative survey is to qualify the current and future capacity needs ,
unmet needs , and interest and level of support for the development and implementation of a fiber broadband
network . Some of those interviewed could be potential customers as major commercial accounts , or they could
be an influencer in the community. Uptown Services conducted 24 interviews and aggregated the responses for
confidentiality.
Uptown Services found that due to multiple incumbent providers competing in the large business/institution
segment, fiber is not only deployed , but activated to many of these business locations . Advance data needs are
being met with dedicated connections for the business/institutions sole usage . However, many of the large
business/institutions interviewed would consider the City as a fiber network provider - lower price was a key factor
for these firms .
Take Rate
The consultants use a conservative research technique from the Packaged Goods sector to estimate potential
subscribership rate . This technique has been utilized for over 30 -years and was developed as firms realized
research respondents , for various reasons , overstate purchase intentions during research as compared to the
eventual penetration of a product that was commercially launched .
Municipal systems , which are not-for- profit enterprises , measure a broadband project "success" by the level of
their "take rate" - that is , the percentage of potential subscribers who are offered the service that actually
subscribe . Uptown Services is estimating that the take rate for residential Internet service in Fort Collins at 38 . 8%
and 45% for small business (i . e . , 38 . 8% of residents are estimated to subscribe to the fiber network , if offered ) .
Small business penetration is over a 7-year period compared to5-years for residential (consumer behavior
indicates that small business owners will first try the service at home before determining whether to switch at their
business) .
Online Broadband Survey
Due to interest, staff made the majority of the residential phone survey available online to anyone who wanted to
participate . This was not intended to be statistically valid , but rather to allow more residents to engage in the
conversation . Over 1 , 800 responses were received and the results were in line with the statistically valid ,
residential phone survey. The exception being that the online questionnaire saw a higher response from younger
demographics . Full results can be viewed online at fcgov. com/broadband .
Staff reviewed and themed the write- in comments for the following questions :
What would you like to see most improved from your current services ( broadband , cableTV, Internet, local
telephone ) and ; any additional comments?
Staff received 1 ,453 comments addressing improvements and themed them by the following categories :
• Speed (33% )
• Price (26 % )
• Reliability ( 17% )
Packet Pg . 5
April 26 , 2016 Page 4
• Customer Service ( 10% )
• Miscellaneous ( 14% )
The 687 "additional comments" were themed in the following categories :
• Support for a municipal broadband option and/or addressed broadband as a utility. (27% )
• Dissatisfaction with current service or providers and/or addressed the need for additional competition .
(26% )
• A desire for fiber/Google fiber/better infrastructure . ( 19% )
• Thank you for the opportunity to weigh in and for looking at this initiative . ( 15% )
• Need for affordable , reliable , high speed service for the community as a whole , business needs , or our
economic future . (8% )
• Miscellaneous or other. ( 15 % )
Broadband Citizen Committee
The core team has convened a group of 18 citizens representing a variety of geography, skill - and user-level , and
overall broadband interest. The purpose for this citizen group is to :
• Review and discuss materials provided by City staff and Uptown Services ;
• Help staff design communications for the broader public ; and
• Be a liaison to the public regarding current process , engagement opportunities , and to share questions .
The Broadband Citizen Committee has met twice since the beginning of 2016 , and staff anticipates the group
meeting about every six weeks throughout 2016 .
Expert Review Panel
City staff has worked to put together a Broadband Expert Review Panel (" ERP" ) . The purpose of the Broadband
ERP is to :
• Provide independent, expert technical review during the development of the City's broadband plan to
ensure that critical questions are posed and assessed ;
• Review and discuss documents provided by City staff and Uptown Services , LLC to ensure that the
project' s feasibility; and
• Guide the preparation of the overall Broadband plan through the panels review of methodologies and
assumptions , and to ensure that the assumptions in the plan are appropriate and reasonable .
The Broadband ERP will convene in Fort Collins on May 2 , 2016 . The first meeting with the Broadband ERP will
familiarize the panelists to the Fort Collins community, staff and the project.
Members of the Broadband ERP include :
• Lev Gonick , co-founder and Chief Executive Officer of OneCommunity. Mr. Gonick and OneCommunity
was recognized by Broadband Communities with their Cornerstone Award for " using fiber to build an
inclusive society and empower individuals . "
• Robert Houlihan , Chief Technology Officer of Cedar Falls Utilities . Mr. Houlihan manages the Cedar Falls
Utilities network infrastructure , which services over 13 , 000 Internet and cable TV subscribers .
• Blair Levin , Senior Fellow at Brookings Institute . Mr. Levin ' s served as Executive Director of the Federal
Communications Commission 's ( FCC) 2009 National Broadband Plan and as the FCC Chief of Staff from
1993 - 1997 .
• Deb Socia , Executive Director of Next Century Cities , a new initiative that strives to support community
leaders across the United States as they seek to ensure that all have access to fast, affordable and
reliable Internet. Prior to Ms . Socia ' s role at Next Century Cities , she was the Executive Director of the
Tech Goes Home program , whose mission is to ensure digital equity through training , hardware and low
cost Internet access .
Packet Pg . 6
April 26 , 2016 Page 5
Next Steps
With the completion of the broadband service market demand report, Uptown Services and City staff has begun
work on a 15-year pro forma forecast. As part of the greater financial analysis , Uptown Services and staff will
work to complete an analysis of various business structure options by exploring strategic , financial and
organizational implications of each business structure .
The feasibility analysis methodology creates a market-driven demand planning tool that is flexible and will allow
for various options and strategies rather than a detailed business plan of a single option . Based on the findings of
the financial and strategic analysis , the broadband core team will engage citizens , businesses and City Council
(the next work session is scheduled for August 23 , 2016) to present findings , goals and strategies of the
broadband plan . Following this work and community outreach , staff anticipates having a recommendation
outlining a long-term broadband plan in late fall 2016 .
ATTACHMENTS
1 . Fort Collins Market Demand Report ( PDF )
2 . Powerpoint presentation ( PDF )
Packet Pg . 7
1 1
UPTOWN
SERVIC ES . LLC
FTTP Feasibility Study
for =
The City of Fort Collins
Broadband Market Demand Report
March 2016
Uptown Services, LLC
Dave Stockton & Neil Shaw, Principals
Packet • •
ie
UPTOWN CONTENTS .
SIRVIC IS . LLC
This report summarizes the research findings of 3 specific market segments in Ft . Collins :
1 . Residential Market
2 Quantitative Survey Design
2 Consumption Patterns
2 =
Satisfaction & Attribute Importance
2 Demand Estimation .
2 . Small Business Market
2 Same as residential
3 . Large Business Market
2 Depth Interview Participants
2 Current Service Configuration and Price Levels
2 Available Service Features and Needs
2 Satisfaction & Attribute Importance
2 Demand Estimation
4/20/2016 Study conducted by Uptown Services, LLC
9
1 . 1
m
Y
L
C�
C
M
ma
Q
D
FL
W
M
L
N
0
ML
W
Residential
, • • • Survey M
v
_ 0
nt Broadband Services • • • QN�
I.L
M
E
0
W
Y
L
CM
C
Cn
0
U
0
LL
a�
AdE
t�
M
Packet Pg . 10
ie
UPTOWN DESIGN FRAMEWORK
SERVICES . LLC
2 Area of Interest : universe of • 60 , 000 households ( HHs )
❖ Total sample size of 400 respondents .
❖ 95 % Confidence Interval with ± 4 . 9 sample error )
2 Results weighted to reflect Ft . Collins actual age distribution from 2010 Census -
data ( age of householder )
2 Respondents screened to ensure
❖ Decision - maker for telecommunications and entertainment services in the .
home
❖ Respondents with immediate family members employed by any of the
following were excluded :
The City of Fort Collins -
CenturyLink
Comcast
4/20/2016 Study conducted by Uptown Services, LLC
Packet - .
ie
UPTOWN INTERNET SERVICE PURCHASING BEHAVIOR
SERVICESALC
Incidence of Internet Households
2 99 % of Fort Collins households use the 1 %
Internet at home
2 Cable Modem and DSL have the vast
majority of market share at 94%
99 % -
No Internet Have Internet
Internet Market Share
(Households)
4% 2%
37%
57% -
Dial Up DSL ■ Cable Modem Satellite Other
4/20/2016 Study conducted by Uptown Services, LLC
. g
kAk�—
UPTOWN INTERNET SERVICE PURCHASING BEHAVIOR
SERVICES , LLC
Monthly Internet Spend
2 Comcast and CenturyLink are the only
two ISPs with material market share in 30% . '
Fort Collins
2
Stated average monthly Internet spend 20%
is $ 46 per household
10%
0% 7
< $ 30 $ 30 $40 $ 50 $ 60 $ 70 > $ 70
Internet Access Provider Market Share '
61 %
37 %
1 % 0 % 1 %
Comcast CenturyLink FRII Rise Broadband Other
4/20/2016 Study conducted by Uptown Services, LLC
Packet . g
ie
UPTOWN INTERNET USAGE BY HOUSEHOLD DEMOGRAPHIC
SERVICES . LLC
Incidence of No Internet by Income
2 Internet usage is prevalent across 20%
all income and age groups
15%
2 Overall , the type of Internet does
not vary significantly across age 10%
groups
5 % —
0% .
Up to $ 50k $ 50k - $ 100k - $ 150k - > $ 200k
$ 100k $ 150k $ 200k
Incidence of No Internet by Age Internet Type by Age '
20% Cable Modem DSL Satellite
80% -
15 %
60%
10% -
40%
o •
5 /0 20%
0% — 0% —
20 - 34 35 - 44 45 - 54 55 - 64 65 - 74 20 - 34 35 - 44 45 - 54 55 - 64 65 - 74
4/20/2016 Study conducted by Uptown Services, LLC
. g
ie
UPTOWN VOICE SERVICES USAGE
SERVICES . LLC
Number of Phone Lines in the Home
2 Wireless substitution is lower than the =
national average at 24% of HHs 64%
2 A further 9 % of wireline phone users will National Average
%drop for wireless in the next 12 months 4146 / 42 %
Longmont
2 The average number of lines is . -
❖ All Households : 0 . 9 24% Ft Collins
❖ Wireline Households : 1 . 1
7% $% 6% 5 %
Q12o "How likely are you to disconnect the
wired phone line and only use your cell... "
None 1 2 3 or More =
Source : National Health Interview Survey, July- December 2013 '
Definitely Will
6% Households Without Wireline Phone Service '
67% by Age
Probably Will 12 %
Might/ Might Not 14% -
Probably Won 't 24% 10 /°° 16% 14% '
6%
Definitely Won 't 44%
20 - 34 35 - 44 45 - 54 55 - 64 65 - 74
4/20/2016 Study conducted by Uptown Services, LLC0 Packet I
- .
ie
UPTOWN WIRELINE PHONE MARKET SHARE
SERVICES . LLC
Q8 : "Who is your local phone service
2 CenturyLink still maintains market share
provider ?"
leadership of the residential voice market
2 Stated residential spending on local 24%
phone service averages about $ 34 0io 44%
0
monthly per HH
32 % -
CenturyLink Comcast TDS No Wireline
Monthly Local Phone Spending
30%
20%
10% -
0%
$ 20 $ 30 $40 $ 50 > $ 50 DK
4/20/2016 Study conducted by Uptown Services, LLC
P
ie
UPTOWN VIDEO SERVICES PURCHASING BEHAVIOR
SERVICESALC
Q2 : "For TV service, do you have.. . "
2 Only 68 % of households use traditional
s%
pay TV ( cable or satellite dish ) 10% . '
2 In Fort Collins today, 32 % of households 44%
do not have Pay TV 14%
2 The national average for HHs without Pay
TV is 24% ( Pew Research ) 24%
2 Stated average monthly spend : "
Cable : $ 70
Cable Satellite Off Air
Satellite : $ 68 Online Other/ None
Monthly Pay TV Spend
40%
30%
20%
Cable •
Satellite
10%
0%
$ 25 $50 $ 75 $ 100 $ 125 + Don 't
4/20/2016 Study conducted by Uptown Services, LLC Know
ie
UPTOWN EMERGING VIDEO SERVICES
SERVICES . LLC
Q6 : "Do you sometimes watch TV online ?"
2 Over-the -Top ( OTT ) or online TV viewing (Among Pay TV Households)
has recently become a material substitute
service for traditional cable TV with a
majority of households using OTT
36%
2 Among younger households, up to 35 %
are using OTT or Off Air as a substitute
63 %
service
2 Uptown estimates a further 7 % of pay TV „
users in Fort Collins will `cut the cord ' in
the next 12 months
Yes No
Households Using Substitute Service In Place of Likelihood of Cancelling Pay TV for OTT ,
Pay TV by Age (among all pay TV users)
23%
Definitely Not 41%
15 % 15 % 15 % °
14 % Probably Not 31%
5 % Might/ Might Not — 16%
2 % I •
1 � Probably — 7%
20 - 34 35 - 44 45 - 54 55 - 64 65 - 74 Definitely 5%
4/20/2016 ■ Online ■ Off-Air Study conducted by Uptown Services, LLC
IPacket ' •
ie
UPTOWN BUNDLING
SIRVIC IS . LLC
2 Across all households in Fort Collins Incidence of Triple Play Bundle
40 % have all 3 services from a single
provider. This is higher due to
incidence of wireline voice service 20%
2 The importance of bundling is low 40%
when compared to our 2013 =
Longmont survey
Importance of Having All 3 Services from a Single Provider
0%
(Among All Respondents)
Ft Collins Longmont Have All 3 Services From Multiple
30% 29% Providers
,
24% Have All 3 From Single Provider
22%
19% 20%
18% Do Not Have All 3 Services
15 %
13 %
10%
Very Somewhat Neither Somewhat Very
Important Important Unimportant Unimportant
4/20/2016 Study conducted by Uptown Services, LLC '
Packet . g
ie
UPTOWN SATISFACTION RATINGS
SERVICES , LLC
Satisfaction Rating by Service/Service Provider
(Mean Rating on a 1 -10 Scale)
10 . 0 Ft Collins Longmont 8 . 7 8 . 6
7 . 7 7 . 5 7 . 5 -
8 . 0 6 . 7 6 . 7 6 . 8 7 . 0 7 . 2
6 . 6 6 . 6
5 . 6 5 . 7
6 . 0
4 . 0
2 . 0
0 . 0 -
Cable TV Satellite TV Non - Pay TV DSL Cable Modem Telephone Utility
Satisfaction Rating by Service/Service Provider
(Percent Rating a '9' or '10')
0
80 % 64% 65 %
60% -
0
40% 36 0 31% 29 •
23% 0 23% � 9°i 23% 0 31%
20%
12 % 15% '
0%
Cable TV Satellite TV Non - Pay TV DSL Cable Modem Telephone Utility
4/20/2016 Study conducted by Uptown Services, LLC
ie
UPTOWN SATISFACTION RATING BENCHMARKS
SERVICESALC
2 The chart below compares the results of this study with 24 other markets where Uptown has
completed similar quantitative research : . '
Northern Ohio (2) Washington North Carolina Oregon (2)
Southern Ohio Wisconsin Kansas (2) Alabama
Georgia Oklahoma (2) New York Arkansas
Tennessee (4) Michigan Kentucky Colorado (2)
Satisfaction Rating by Service/Service Provider
(Mean Rating on a 1 to 10 Scale)
9
8
7
6 — —
5
Cable Satellite TV DSL Cable Modem Telephone utility
4/20/2016
. g
ie
UPTOWN ATTRIBUTE IMPORTANCE
SERVICES . LLC
2 While reliability and price are always important, Internet speed has dramatically increased in
importance over the last several years . Bundling and Brand are secondary in importance to
other attributes . . .
Importance Rating of Select Broadband Service Attributes
(Mean Rating on a 1 -5 Scale)
4 . 8 4 . 8
5 . 0 4 . 4 4 . 4 4 . 4 4 . 4 4 . 4 4 . 5 ,
4 . 0
3 . 0
3 . 1 3 . 0 — - '
2 . 8
'
2 . 0
1 . 0
0 . 0 .
Brand Service Bundle Customer Internet Speed Price Reliability
Service
Ft Collins Longmont
4/20/2016 Study conducted by Uptown Services, LLC
P
ie
UPTOWN IMPORTANCE OF DOWNLOAD VS . UPLOAD
SERVICESALC
z -
Question 33 : "What aspect of Internet speed is most important ? "
Importance of Internet Speed on Download vs . Upload
59 % 59 % -
37 %
34% -
4%
1 %
Download Most Important Upload Most Important Both Important
Ft Collins Longmont
4/20/2016 Study conducted by Uptown Services, LLC
Packet - .
ie
UPTOWN CUSTOMER NEEDS .
SERVICES . LLC
z Lower prices and increased Internet speed dominate the wish list for services improvement as Internet speed has gained importance . . .
Q32 : "What would you like to see most improved from your current broadband
services ?"
Lower Prices 37 /o 49 /
'
Increased Internet Speed 29 % 34%
o
Reliability 16 / 34% '
Longmont
15 % Ft Collins =
Nothing 10 %
9 %
Customer Service 10 %
%
Channel Selection 4% '
Bundling Service 1 %
4/20/2016 Study conducted by Uptown Services, LLC
ie
UPTOWN IMPORTANCE OF LOW COST HIGH - SPEED INTERNET
SERVICESALC
z
Question 299 " In your opinion , is the availability of low- cost, high - speed Internet important
to the future local economy ? "
Importance of Having Low Cost High-Speed Internet
Ft Collins Longmont
81 %
68 %
25 %
14%
4% 2% 2 % 1
Very Important Somewhat Neither Somewhat Very Unimportant
Important Unimportant
4/20/2016 Study conducted by Uptown Services, LLC
- .
kAk�-
UPTOWN ELECTRIC BILL SURCHARGE .
SERVICES , LLC
2 Over half of Ft Collins households support the payment of a monthly $ 5 surcharge to help -
fund the new fiber network . . .
Q34a "Would you support adding a $5 monthly fee to your electric bill to partially fund the
construction and operation of this network for the first 24 months of operation ?"
Ft Collins Longmont
57%
1 would support •
21 %
I would be neutral 35 �
22 %
1 would not support 22 %
4/20/2016
1 . 1
m
Y
L
C�
C
Q
D
FL
W
�a
L
N
0
ML
Residential
W
Quantitative v
0
FTTP Market Potential
fC
E
0
d
Y
L
C�
C
Cn
0
U
0
LL
a�
E
t�
ca
a
Packet Pg . 27
ie
UPTOWN PURCHASE INTENT
SERVICES . LLC
2 70 % of respondents indicated they would definitely or probably switch to the =
FTTP system for Internet service . . .
Q25 - 27 : "How likely would you be to subscribe to [ insert service ] if it were 10 °0 less
than Comcast or CenturyLink charges ?
100%
75%
50%
25%
0%
Internet Phone Video
■ Definitely 40% 25 % 19%
Probably 30% 31 % 32%
Might/ Might Not 19 % 17% 19% .
■ Probably Not 6% 11 % 17%
Definitely Not 3 % 13 % 10%
■ Don 't Know 3 % 3 % 3 %
4/20/2016 Study conducted by Uptown Services, LLC 21
' •
ie
UPTOWN PENETRATION CALCULATIONS
SERVICES . LLC
2 Uptown uses a ' Likert Scale ' with Overstatement Adjustment
❖ Conservative research techniques from the Packaged Goods sector
❖ Clearly specify purchase intent vs . " interest " and removes overstatement bias
2 Example : " How likely would you be to subscribe ? "
❖ Definitely Would 21 . 5 % x 70% = 15 . 0%
❖ Probably Would 35 . 6 % x 30% = 10 . 7 %
❖ Might/ Might Not 20 . 0% x 10% = 2 . 0% "
❖ Probably Would Not 10 . 4% 27 . 7 % = Penetration Estimate
❖ Definitely Would Not 4 . 4%
❖ Don ' t Know 8 . 1 %
Residential Longmont
(Terminal Year 5 Eroded ) (Terminal )
4/20/2016 Study conducted by Uptown Services, LLC
ie
UPTOWN I NTE RN ET MARKET SHARE IMPACT
SERVICES . LLC
Purchase Intent by Internet Connection
2 Expected Internet purchase intent by (Top Two Box at 10% Discount)
current connection type : -
Cable Modem DSL Satellite
❖ Cable Modem User : 43 % would switch
❖ DSL User : 36 % would switch 47% -
❖ Satellite User : 36% would switch 33 % 35 % 36%
27% 26% -
Definitely Would Probably Would
Current Internet Market Share Internet Market Share Post FTTP System
(Households) (Households)
4% 2 -
2% 2 %
37% 33 /o 0 39 %
57% •
24%
FTTP System DSL Cable Modem ■ Satellite ■ Other FTTP System DSL Cable Modem Satellite Other
April 16 Study conducted by Uptown Services, LLC
P
ie
UPTOWN PROVIDER PREFERENCE
SERVICES . LLC
2 The majority of respondents, when given the choice, would prefer to receive high speed
Internet from the City . . .
Q28 : 'Among the following list of potential providers, who would you prefer to
receive high -speed Internet service from ? "
Ft Collins Longmont
52 %
45 %
23 %
19 %
11 % 9 % 15 '`l2 %
8 /
4% 3 % .
tJ�\�� �A
< \000�` a�a�a oJ�ao�
��� Lo �r �o �03 �� o�
O
� P
4/20/2016 Study conducted by Uptown Services, LLC
Packet - .
ie
UPTOWN PROJECT APPEAL BY AGE
SERVICES . LLC
z In terms of both preference for the City as well as purchase intent, younger households -
( 20- 34 ) place the greatest value on the fiber project and the City 's role . . .
88%
78 % 78 % 81 %
71% -
54% 51 % o -
49 /o
44% 43 % '-
37 % 34% 35
3
23 %
20 - 34 35 - 44 45 - 54 55 - 64 65 - 74
■ Prefer City As Provider Low Cost High Speed Internet ' Very Important ' Definitely ' Subscribe
4/20/2016 Study conducted by Uptown Services, LLC
. g
ie
UPTOWN MOTIVATION TO CHANGE INTERNET PROVIDER
SERVICESALC
z -
Question 31 : " In stating that you would `definitely ' or ` probably' subscribe to the fiber
network for Internet service , what is the primary reason you would switch ? "
39 %
36 % -
20 % ;
4%
Prefer City as Provider Prefer the Lower Price Prefer Higher Capacity Other Reason
4/20/2016 Study conducted by Uptown Services, LLC
Packet - .
ie
UPTOWN PURCHASE INTENT BENCHMARKING
SERVICESALC
Terminal Penetration by Service
(Across all Tested Price Points)
50%
40
30% ♦ • ♦ -
♦ • ♦ _ ♦ ♦ ♦ -
20%
10% —
Video Internet Phone -
0% -
co U o LU L L z O a C f N > x > N
U
LL
4/20/2016 Study conducted by Uptown Services, LLC c
. 9
ie
UPTOWN PENETRATION FORECAST
SERVICES . LLC
2 Business case projections for voice penetration reflect the quantitative research outcome and
reflect ongoing wireless ( voice ) and OTT ( video ) substitution within the residential segment . . . . '
Service Penetration
(By Year Since Launch)
45% —
40% "
35%
30% •
25% -
20%
15%
10%
5 % •
0% •
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14
Year
Phone ,Video , Internet
4/20/2016 Study conducted by Uptown Services, LLC
Packet - .
ie
UPTOWN INTERNET PENETRATION OF MUNI OVERBUILDERS
SERVICES , LLC
Internet Penetration
(By Month Since Launch)
50%
40
30%
20% •
10%
0% '
0 6 12 18 24 30 36 42 48 54 60 66 72 78 84 90 96 102 108
Month
�Sallisaw, OK Morristown , TN — Pulaski, TN Wilson, NC
Tullahoma, TN Murray, KY Bristol, VA Ft Collins Forecast
4/20/2016 Study conducted by Uptown Services, LLC 29
ie
UPTOWN VOICE PENETRATION OF MUNI OVERBUILDERS
SERVICES , LLC
Phone Penetration
(By Month Since Launch) '
30%
25 %
20%
15 %
10%
5% —
0%
0 6 12 18 24 30 36 42 48 54 60 66 72 78 84 90 96
Month
�Sallisaw Morristown — Pulaski Wilson Tullahoma, TN Bristol , VA Ft Collins Forecast
4/20/2016 Study conducted by Uptown Services, LLC
IPacket . g
ie
UPTOWN VIDEO PENETRATION OF MUNI OVERBUILDERS
SERVICES , LLC
Video Penetration
(By Month Since Launch)
60%
50% .
40% ,
Y
30%
20%
10%
0% •
0 6 12 18 24 30 36 42 48 54 60 66 72 78 84 90 96 102 108
Month
� Sallisaw, OK Morristown , TN Pulaski, TN Wilson , NC
Tullahoma, TN Jackson, TN Murray, KY Columbia , TN
Bristol , VA Ft Collins Forecast
4/20/2016 Study conducted by Uptown Services, LLC
P
UPTOWN 2013 LPC STUDY PROJECTION : INTERNET PENETRATION
SERVICES . LLC
Internet Penetration -
(By Month Since Launch)
50%
45%
40% \V1 At
IV\
35%
30% 00r7
,
25%
20%
15%
10% - •
5 %
0%
0 6 12 18 24 30 36 42 48 54 60 66 72 78 84 90 96 102 108 •
Month
�Sallisaw, OK Morristown , TN Pulaski , TN •
Wilson , NC Tullahoma , TN Clarksville, TN
Murray, KY Salisbury, NC Bristol , VA
LPC LPC - All Premises LPC - Serviceable Premises
April 16 Study conducted by Uptown Services, LLC
P
1 . 1
m
Y
L
C�
C
M
Ma
Q
D
FL
W
M
L
N
0
ML
W
Small Quantitative M
v
_ 0
Services Usage �.
N�
I.L
M
E
0
W
Y
L
CM
C
Cn
0
U
0
LL
a�
E
t�
M
a
Packet Pg . 40
ie
UPTOWN DESIGN FRAMEWORK
SERVICESALC
2 Area of Interest : Universe of • 7 , 000 small business establishments
❖ Establishments with 0 - 19 employees .
❖ Total sample size of 50 respondents
2 Respondents screened to ensure -
❖ Decision - maker for telecommunications services at the business
❖ Have Internet
❖ Located within city limits and not home - based -
❖ Respondents with immediate family members employed by any of the
following were excluded :
The City of Fort Collins •
CenturyLink -
Comcast
4/20/2016 Study conducted by Uptown Services, LLC
Packet . g
ie
UPTOWN USE OF INTERNET SERVICE
SERVICESALC
Monthly Internet Spend
2 '
Comcast and CenturyLink are the only
two ISPs with material small business 30%
market share in Fort Collins
2 20%
Stated average monthly Internet spend
�
is $ 98 per small business - — —
10
0% 7
��� ��O ADO BOO BOO OOO OOx O� .
Internet Access Provider Market Share Subscribed Download Speed
54%
34%
42 %
26 %
dm
14%
a 0 2 % 6% 8 % 8% .
2 % 2 %
e�
LP�� t 03o� �o� �o� �oo� �oo�
4/20/2016 Study conducted by Uptown Services, LLC O
. g
ie
UPTOWN USE OF VOICE SERVICE
SERVICESALC
Number of Phone Lines at the Business
(Among establishments with wireline voice) =
2 CenturyLink still maintains market share -
leadership of the small business voice 26 %
market
2
Stated spending on voice service averages
about $ 370 monthly per small business o 15 % 15 % o 13o -
13 / 13 / /
6%
Q8 : "Who is your local phone provider ?"
6% 2 % 1 2 3 4 5 6 8 +
Monthly Local Phone Spending
16% 40%
48 %
30%
28% 20%
10%
0%
CenturyLink Comcast ■ Other ��� ��o �,�� ��o <.,�� �oO�x ` 0
No Wireline Don ' t Know
4/20/2016 Study conducted by Uptown Services, LLC >
. g
ie
UPTOWN USE OF VIDEO SERVICE
SERVICES . LLC
Q2 : "For TV service, do you have.. . "
2 Only 24% of small businesses have pay TV
at their business . '
2 Stated average monthly spend is $ 71 22%
2%
76% •
Cable TV Satellite None
Monthly Pay TV Spend '
60%
50%
40%
30% •
20% — •
10%
0%
$50 $ 100 $ 150 Don 't Know
4/20/2016 Study conducted by Uptown Services, LLC
. g
ie
UPTOWN INCIDENCE OF CONTRACTS
SERVICES . LLC
2 Two -thirds of small businesses in Fort Incidence of Provider Contracts
Collins are under contract for both their . '
Internet and voice service .
26%
2 %
6%
66%
Both Internet and Voice
Internet Only
Voice Only
No Contract
4/20/2016 Study conducted by Uptown Services, LLC
Packet . g
ie
UPTOWN SATISFACTION RATINGS
SERVICES , LLC
Satisfaction Rating by Service/Service Provider
(Mean Rating on a 1 -10 Scale)
9 . 0
10 . 0
8 . 0
6 . 9 7 . 3
5 . 1 .
6 . 0
4 . 0
2 . 0
0 . 0
Pay TV Internet Voice Utilit
Satisfaction Rating by Service/Service Provider
(Percent Rating a '9' or '10')
78%
80%
60% •
40% ° 24%
20% 8%
0%
Pay TV Internet Voice Utilit
4/20/2016 Study conducted by Uptown Services, LLC
ie
UPTOWN ATTRIBUTE IMPORTANCE
SERVICES . LLC
2 While reliability and price are always important, Internet speed has dramatically increased in
importance over the last several years . Bundling and Brand are secondary in importance to
other attributes . . .
Importance Rating of Select Broadband Service Attributes
(Mean Rating on a 1 -5 Scale)
4 . 7 4 . 9 4 . 8
5 . 0 4 . 4 4 . 5 4 . 4 4 . 6 4 . 4
4 . 0 -
3 . 0
1 .8 0
2 . 0
1 . 0 -
0 . 0
Brand Customer Service Internet Speed Price Reliability
Small Business Residential
4/20/2016 Study conducted by Uptown Services, LLC
. g
ie
UPTOWN IMPORTANCE OF DOWNLOAD VS . UPLOAD
SERVICESALC
z
Question 25 : "What aspect of Internet speed is most important ? "
Importance of Internet Speed on Download vs . Upload
76 % =
59 % .
37 % ;
16 %
1 %
Download Most Important Upload Most Important Both Important
Small Business Residential
4/20/2016 Study conducted by Uptown Services, LLC _
Packet . g
ie
UPTOWN CUSTOMER NEEDS .
SERVICES . LLC
z Lower prices and increased Internet speed dominate the wish list for services improvement as Internet speed has gained importance . . .
Q23/320 "What would you like to see most improved from your current
broadband services ?"
37 %
Lower Prices 32 % -
Increased Internet Speed 34%34%
Reliability 34 / 48
10 %
Nothing 10 % Residential
10 % Small Business
Customer Service 10 %
Channel Selection
4% -
Bundling Service 1 %
4/20/2016 Study conducted by Uptown Services, LLC
ie
UPTOWN DESIRED DOWNLOAD SPEED
SERVICES . LLC
2 Comcast and CenturyLink are the only two ISPs with material small business market share in
Fort Collins
Q24 : "What level of Internet download speed would you want if the following
were available to your place of business ? "
36 %
26% -
18%
12%
6% -
2 %Ai
Same As Have 20M 50M 100M 1G Don 't Know
Now
4/20/2016 Study conducted by Uptown Services, LLC
. •
kAk�—
UPTOWN PURCHASE INTENT
SERVICES , LLC
2 88 % of small businesses indicated they would definitely or probably switch to =
the FTTP system for Internet service . . .
Q19 - 21 : "How likely would you be to subscribe to [ insert service ] if it were 10 °0 less
than Comcast or CenturyLink charges ?
100%
75%
50%
25%
0%
Internet Phone Video
■ Definitely 44% 38% 12%
Probably 44% 44% 14%
Might/ Might Not 10% 12 % 16%
■ Probably Not 2 % 6% 10%
Definitely Not 46%
■ Don 't Know 2 %
4/20/2016 Study conducted by Uptown Services, LLC acket Pg . 5!11
1 . 1
ie PENETRATION CALCULATIONS
UPTOWN
SERVICISALC
f�
Q
D
_
f�
FL
a�
�a
L
co
Residential _
M
(Terminal Year 5 Eroded ) (Terminal Year 7 Eroded ) ,d 0
0
ML
W
Video 24 . 6 % / 20 . 9 % ( Year 5 ) 14 . 2 % / 11 . 2 ( Year 7 )
M
Internet 38 . 8 % 45 . 0 %
Telephone 28 . 6% / 14 . 3 % 41 . 0%
Ed
Diffusion % ( Yearsl - 7 ) 0 / 45 / 75 / 90 / 100 / 100 / 100 0 / 25 / 50 / 70 / 80 / 90 / 100
J y
_
Q
U
0
um
_
a�
E
t�
4/20/2016 Study conducted by
ca
a
Uptown - -
Packet Pg . 52
ie
UPTOWN PROVIDER PREFERENCE
SERVICES . LLC
2 The majority of respondents, when given the choice, would prefer to receive high speed
Internet from the City . . .
Q28 : 'Among the following list of potential providers, who would you prefer to
receive high -speed Internet service from ? "
Small Business Residential
45 %
36% =
24% 2413
15 %
11 %
6% 2 % 4% 4% 2 % 3 % -
0% 0% 0 % 20� 0 %
CP
�, Pam° O
4/20/2016 Study conducted by Uptown Services, LLC
Packet - .
ie
UPTOWN PENETRATION FORECAST
SERVICESALC
Service Penetration
(By Year Since Launch)
50%
45%
F ,
40%
35%
30% //000
25% -
20%
15%
10%
5 % •
0% •
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15
Year
Phone ,Video , Internet
4/20/2016 Study conducted by Uptown Services, LLC
1 . 1
m
Y
L
C�
C
M
ma
Q
D
FL
W
M
L
N
O
ML
Large Business Institutions
W
M
O
Q
O
w
ma
C
M
E
O
0
d
Y
L
M
2
Cn
O
U
O
LL
W
E
t�
ca
Q
Packet Pg . 55
kAk�_
UPTOWN COMMERCIAL BROADBAND SERVICES MARKET
SERVICES , LLC
Metro Ethernet Dedicated Internet
Internet Access (Transport ) (Access )
Small Businesses and
Market Segment Medium/ Large Medium to Large Business and Institutions :
depending on sector
Network Last Mile Last Mile
Architecture ( Copper, Coax, or or
Fiber ) Middle Mile ( Fiber lateral to ring )
Majority of
Potential Market connections Typically less than 100 connections per urban
Size market
( 90% of all premises )
Connection Type
Shared bandwidth Dedicated Private Dedicated bandwidth
( GPON ) Circuit ( s ) or MAN ( ActiveQ
Point -to- point Dedicated access
Typical Data Standard Internet tiers transport from 100M bandwidth from 100M
Service Set up to 1G
L�. to 10G + to 10G +
April 16 49
Packet . g
ie
UPTOWN HIGH CAPACITY COMMERCIAL MARKET NEEDS
SERVICES . LLC
2 Typical High Capacity Needs and Desired Service Attributes '
2 Infrastructure Availability : Fiber is the Standard
2 Dedicated Capacity : Superior to shared bandwidth connections
2 Competitive Pricing
2 Service Experience : Reliability, Customer Service , and Responsiveness
2 Network Integration : Select firms require national /global tier 1 provider
2 High Capacity Providers in Fort Collins
2 Infrastructure & Bandwidth : FRII , Comcast, CenturyLink, Level3 , PRPA
2
Bandwidth : FRII , Comcast, CenturyLink, Level3 , PRPA, AT&T, Integra
April 16 Study conducted by Uptown Services, LLC
ie
UPTOWN RESEARCH APPROACH
SERVICES . LLC
2 Qualitative assessment of large business market in Ft . Collins '
2 24 Depth Interviews of 30 -40 minutes
2 Responses aggregated for confidentiality =
2 Identify key market characteristics
2 Fiber availability, capacity needs , performance criteria .
2 Current price levels, use of contracts , and connection requirements
2 Estimate potential market share
2 Satisfaction and switching criteria
2 Openness to City- provided fiber services
April 16 Study conducted by Uptown Services, LLC
kAk�_
UPTOWN DEPTH INTERVIEW PARTICIPANTS
SERVICES , LLC
Health Care Services Retail Goods
❖ Univ. of Colorado Health Press One Customer Care New Belgium Brewery
❖ Exponential Engineering Odell Brewing Co .
❖ Neenan Archistruction
❖ Brinkman Construction
Technology Education /Government Manufacturing
❖ Riverside Technology ❖ Poudre School District ❖ Rodelle
❖ Numerica ❖ Poudre River Library ❖ Tolmar
❖ Wolf Robotics District ❖ Forney Industries
❖ Woodward Inc . ❖ Colorado State Univ. In - Situ
❖ Technigraphics ( CACI ) _04<6L
❖ Air Resource Specialist Other Retail Service Provider
❖ Broadcom .;. Fort Collins Chamber of VO FRII '
❖ CSI Web Commerce •
April 16 Study conducted by Uptown Services, LLC '
. g
ie
UPTOWN NATIONAL DEPLOYMENT OF COMMERCIAL FIBER
SIRVIC IS . LLC
Nationally, aggressive rollouts of fiber by incumbent and alternative providers have substantially -
increased the availability of fiber to commercial buildings . . .
" The majority of new fiber deployments were focused on connecting medium and smaller buildings in
the metro areas surrounding major cities across the U . S . Broader accessibility to on - net fiber has started
to shake up the services markets ." - Rosemary Cochran , principal at Vertical Systems Group =
Percentage of Commercial Buildings Served by Fiber
( Total U. S. Buildings with 20+ Employees)
39 % 43
32 %
28%
19 %
11 %
2004 2008 2010 2011 2013 2014
Source: Vertical Systems Group, April 2015
April 16 Study conducted by Uptown Services, LLC
Packet . • 60
kAk�—
UPTOWN NEEDS ARE BEING MET
SERVIC ES . LLC
Due to multiple incumbent providers competing for the commercial segment, fiber
has been deployed to most business locations and is heavily utilized . Advanced data
needs are being met, but businesses will consider the City as a provider option . . .
Fiber Available ? 19 1
Have Fiber ? 17 3
Dedicated Connection ? 8
Have Redundancy ? 5 Ye
No =
Have Unmet Needs ? 19
Under Contract ? 3
Will Consider the City ? ;7 1
0% 20% 40 % 60% 80 % 100 %
April 16 Study conducted by Uptown Services, LLC
Pg , 61
kAk�—
UPTOWN SATISFACTION SCORES .
SERVICES , LLC
Satisfaction levels are moderate and higher for alternative providers
i Average satisfaction is 3 . 7 in Fort Collins Reasonably Satisfied -
i Average satisfaction in Pasadena is 3 . 4 Reliability
•Four providers were rated by 3 or more firms Technical KnowledgeAreas for Improvement
Satisfaction Rating by Service/Service Provider Proactive Service
(Mean Rating on a 1 -5 Scale) Local Staffing/Support
Leve13 4 . 3 "
FRI I 4 . 0
Comcast 3 . 9 -
Primary Providers
CenturyLink 3 . 2
in For Collins •
PRPA 5 . 0
City of Ft Collins 5 ,
AT&T 3 . 5
Integra 3 . 0 = Less than 3 responses
1 . 0 1 . 5 2 . 0 2 . 5 3 . 0 3 . 5 4 . 0 4 . 5
April 16 Study conducted by Uptown Services, LLC
Pg , 62
ie
UPTOWN SERVICE PROVIDER SELECTION CRITERIA
SERVICES . LLC
Among selection factors , reliability and cost rank highest, likely a result of the
commoditization of high cap services . . . . '
Broadband Provider Selection Criteria Importance
(Mean Rating on a 1 -5 Scale)
• ,
5 . 0
402 4 . 3 4 . 3
4. 0 3 . 8 3 . 8
3 . 0
2 . 6
2 . 4
10
Brand VAS Local Support Technological Redundancy Customer Cost Reliability
Superiority Service
April 16 Study conducted by Uptown Services, LLC
P .
kAk�—
UPTOWN HIGH CAP PRICING
SERVICES , LLC
Price levels in Fort Collins benchmark as high for capacities below 200M but are
more competitive at higher capacities . Average spending per connection is $ 1 , 575
per month . . .
$ 120
$ 100
100 $ 100 =
-
$80 = Fort Collins Dedicated Access
$63 $ 63 Fort Collins Shared Access =
$ 60 Pasadena
$46 $43 Typical Municipal
$40 $35 $36
$ 25
$ 20 $ 2 $ 15 $ 1 $ 19 $ 20
g $ 10
$3
$ 0
o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 � O O O M M O O O O O 0 0 0
r-1 r-1 r-I r-1 r-I r-1 r-I r-I N N N N N M M Ln I *� O O O O
r-1 r1 r-1 r1
Source: Fort Collins Depth Interviews among 23 commercial institutions (2016) and Pasadena Depth Interviews among 19 commercial institutions (2014).
April 16 Study conducted by Uptown Services, LLC
. g
ie
UPTOWN LARGE BUSINESS VOICE SERVICE
SERVICES . LLC
Large businesses in Fort Collins are moving away from traditional voice circuits and
onto VoIP platforms that move traffic onto the firm 's data connection .
2
Average cost per analog line ( 1F13 ) : $ 50 per month
2 Average cost per PRI circuit ( 1FB ) : $ 400 - $ 500 per month
Voice Solution Type
( % of Respondents )
11 %
28 % 1FBs
PRI
11 % 500 ° Hosted PBX
VolP over Data
4/20/2016 Study conducted by Uptown Services, LLC
Packet ' • 65
ie
UPTOWN PERCEIVED MOTIVATION FOR FTTP
SERVICES . LLC
Percentage of Respondents by Motivation Choice
( Closed Ended with 3 Options )
62 %
33 % -
5 %
City Revenue New Tech . and Provide Better
Diversification Econ . Service
Development
4/20/2016 Study conducted by Uptown Services, LLC
Packet . • 66
ie
UPTOWN LARGE BUSINESS SEGMENT FINDINGS
SERVICES . LLC
Research Findings :
2 Fiber is widely available and there is a high incidence of dedicated access via fiber
2 Most firms have sufficient bandwidth currently, but some would upgrade if cost effective
2 Telecom and broadband needs are being met, but firms are open to considering the City =
network for a data connection . Lower price is a key switching factor for these firms
2 Some firms will wait to evaluate the track record of the FTTP system
Pro Forma :
2 Estimate the dedicated access market as 5 % of the all commercial entities ( • 400 ) with
penetration growing to 20% by Year 8 .
2 High incidence of dedicated access, but competitive . Estimate ARPU at $ 1, 500 per
connection to reflect • 30 % discount ( at tiers of 500M + )
2 Voice services can be delivered via PRI , analog lines, and hosted PBX solutions, but
migration to VolP over the data connection will limit long term revenue potential .
April 16 Study conducted by Uptown Services, LLC
' • 67
ie
UPTOWN TASK 3 FINDINGS
SERVICES . LLC
2 The two incumbents have the vast majority of market share for both Internet and
voice services in Fort Collins
2 Satisfaction for Internet and voice service benchmarks low. Video is average .
2 Top market needs are :
2 Mass Market : Lower prices, increased Internet speed , and improved reliability
2 Complex Market : Lower prices and carrier-grade reliability
2 Mass market purchase intent is very high and exceeds Longmont survey metrics '
2 Complex market needs are being met, but price levels are high up to 200M =
2 Strong provider preference for the City within the mass market . The complex market
is open to considering the City FTTP network as a provider option .
2 The project appeal and purchase intent is strongest among younger households
April 16
. •
ATTACHMENT
n
FCity of �PTow ,
ort Collins _
� "s. . �. �r�� � � • _ - ,.. :,try... _�.�� r�-•�!'�#- � :� �YA�^�� st_ _
Cu
CIO
?) tqmCu
- '* +
•
SON; IUUL; Cu
AWL
•
CL
Broadband Market Demand Study — City of Fort Collins -
Study Conducted by Uptown Services , LLC
CIO
Packet
. g
1 . 2
_
�a
E
m
City of
0
, Fort Collins Y L
/ • Timeline
Formation of Council Work Council Work Council D
Expert Review Session 4/26 Session 8/23 Recommendation Sessionrm
AR 7a
' MAYAUGOCTNOV ai
a�
�a
L
Citizen Ad-Hoc I i +'
_
Asset Report
fC
0
Broadband ! StandardsMarket m
o�
Demand Surveys
v
Feasibility
_
0
SWOT
i +
_
Revised U)
a�
Expert Review Broadband Recommendation RecI 1 . 1 Q
_
'o
Community • . ' Q
L
3
0
a
m
E
la
a
Packet Pg . 70
1 . 2
_
�a
E
m
City of
0
, Fort Collins U
ccL
CU
Q
D
• 400 respondents
a
U
• Statistically valid phone survey
• Asked opinions on broadband , CU
voice and video
m
M
O
L
Q
.O
L
O
a
m
E
Ca
a
Packet Pg . 71
1 . 2
_
�a
E
m
City of
0
, Fort CollinsNow CU
Internet Service
Y
sL
Q
4 � zoo Internet Market Share rm
Cable Modem and DSL have the vast (Households)
majority of market share at 94 %
L
Cn
_
CU
' I n
M
0
ML
W
M
v
_
57%
_
a�
m
L
Q
_.O
Q
Dial Up Cable Modem ■ DSL Satellite Other 3
0
a
m
E
Ca
a
Packet Pg . 72
1 .2
MO
E
m
City of
art Collins
SatisfactionRatings
CL
■ Ft Collins ■ Longmont Satisfaction Rating by Service/Service Provider D
(Mean Rating on a 1 -10 Scale)
a
10 . 0 8 . 7 8 . 6
7 . 7 7 . 2 N
7 . 0
Ow
8 . 0 6 . 7 6 . 7 7 ' S 6 • 8 6 . 6 6 . 6 7 . 5 �
5 . 6 5 . 7 L
6 . 0 Cn
4 . 0 MO
�a
2 . 0 -a
0 . 0 °
m
Cable TV Satellite TV Non - Pay TV DSL Cable Modem Telephone Utility • •
rn
v
M
80% Percent Rating a 19' or ' 10' °
64% 65 /o a
60%
36% 41%
40% 31 % 29% 31 % a,
23 % 20% 12 / 23 % 15 % 19% 23 % Q
20% °
0% °a
Cable TV Satellite TV Non - Pay TV DSL Cable Modem Telephone Utility 3
0
a
Im
E
u
�a
a
Packet Pg . 73
1 . 2
_
�a
E
m
City of
0
, Fort Collins U
4W • . -
CU
The chart below compares the results of this study with 24 markets where - •
Uptown has completed similar quantitative research : - • •
a
• • U
Satisfaction Rating by Service/Service Provider • - • •
L
(Mean Rating on a 1 to 10 Scale) • - • • Cn
9
8 °
m
7 - - - • .
v
i _ •_ 0
I
6 - - - -
5 -
'o
Cable TV Satellite TV DSL Cable Modem Telephone Utility • • - • •
3
0
a
m
E
Ca
a
Packet Pg . 74
1 .2
Ma
_
E
m
City of
art Collins low
Residential• Customer Needs C
1
C
7
QUESTION : _
"What would you like to see most improved from your current broadband servicesT' a
Lower Prices 37 ° 49%o N
34% a
Increased Internet Speed 29%
34% o
Reliability 16% 00
rn
Nothing 109/0
15%
10% 0
Customer Service 9% c
a�
4% ■ Fort Collins
Channel Selection Q
6%
■ Longmont o
Bundling Service 1% a
a�
3
0
a
IM
E
M
U
�a
a
Packet Pg . 75
1 . 2
_
�a
E
m
City of
0
, Fort Collins U
Electric Bill Surcharge
CU
QUESTION : _
cu
"Would you support adding a $ 5 monthly fee to your electric bill to partially fund the a
construction and operation of this network for the first 24 months of operation ?"
L
Cn
CU
I would support 57%
43 % M
0
ML
W
would be neutral 21 % M
35 %
0
�a
_
I would not support 22 %°
22 /0 ■ Fort Collins
_
Longmont Q
L
3
0
a
m
E
Ca
a
Packet Pg . 76
1 . 2
c
�a
E
m
City of
0
, Fort Collins U
Purchase Intent
cL
1
Question : a
"A fiber optic network could provide high -speed internet service to your household . How likely would you be M
to subscribe to internet if it were 10 % less than Comcast or CenturyLink charges ? a
a�
INTERNET
1 % 1 ' � � 1 ' � a
OTHER RESPONSE� " PROBABLY WOULD') " DEFINITELY WOULD"
L
Purchase Intent by Internet Connection 0°
'Definitely Would' at 10% Discount) ■ Cable Modem
v
DSL =
0
■ Satellite J
c
i N
m
- Q
L
Definitely Would o
a
m
E
Ca
a
Packet Pg . 77
1 .2
Ma
E
m
City of
art Collins NNW
Provider Preference
QUESTION : c
"Among the following list of potential providers, ■ Fort Collins a
who would you prefer to receive high -speed Internet service from ? " ■ Longmont
L
Cn
Ma
52 % M
45 % o
ML
W
M
23 %
19% _
° 15 % 12%
11 /° 9% 84%
4% 3 %
i
Q
CenturyLink Comcast The City FRII A new provider Don ' t Know Q
i
N
3
0
a
IM
E
M
U
�a
a
Packet Pg . 78
1 . 2
_
�a
E
m
City of
0
, Fort Collins For
Take Rate Potential Subscribers
_
RESIDENTIAL
a
a�
LONGMONT
FORT COLLINSCn
_
Ca
Internet 38 . 8 % 36 . 4 %
0
ML
W
M
v
_
0
_
L
Q
_
Note : At just over one year since launch , Longmont NextLight has an actual subscribership of 40 -45 % , Q
most likely due to their Charter Membership Pricing 3
0
a
m
E
Ca
a
Packet Pg . 79
1 . 2
_
�a
E
m
City of
0
, Fort CollinsOWN CU
Internet Market Share Impact
Y
m
ca
a
Current Internet Market Share Internet Market Share Post Fiber System D
(Households) (Households) a
U
49/c 2 % 2 % 2 %
�a
L
_
CU
0
39%
rn
M
v
_
0
57% _
a�
33% L
a
_
'o
CL
Fiber Cable Modem ■ DSL Satellite Other 3
0
a
m
E
Ca
a
Packet Pg . 80
1 . 2
_
�a
E
m
City of
0
, Fort Collins Cu L
1
Cu
D
_
• Establishments with a.
0 - 19 employees
Cn
• Total sample size of Cu
cu
50 respondents
• Responses came back
similar to residential
_
L
Q
L
O
a
m
E
Cu
a
Packet Pg . 81
1 . 2
_
�a
E
m
City of
0
, Fort Collins U
Customer Needs
cL
CU
Q
D
QUESTION :
"What would you like to see most improved from your current broadband services ?" a
32 X
Lower Prices
37% Cn
— 34%
Increased Internet Speed 34%
�a
Reliability 34o 48 % m
/
rn
a
Nothing 10 %
10%
_
10% 0
Customer Service a
10% c
a�
Small Business L
Channel Selection 4%
Residential =
Bundling Service 1 % CL
a�
3
0
a
m
E
�a
a
Packet Pg . 82
1 . 2
_
�a
E
m
City of
0
, Fort Collinslow
Large Business Interviews
Y
sL
CU
Q
HEALTH CARE SERVICES RETAIL GOODS =
• Univ. of Colorado Health Press One Customer Care New Belgium Brewery
• Exponential Engineering •
Odell Brewing Co .
TECHNOLOGY Neenan Archistruction Cn
73
• Riverside Technology Brinkman Construction MANUFACTURING r.
• Numerica Rodelle M
• EDUCATION /GOVERNMENT °
Wolf Robotics Tolmar 0°
• Woodward Inc . Poudre School District Forney Industries M
• Technigraphics ( CACI ) Poudre River Library In - Situ =
• Air Resource Specialist District o
• Broadcom Colorado State Univ. OTHER
• CSI Web RETAIL SERVICE PROVIDER Fort Collins Chamber of
_
• FRII Commerce Q
Study conducted by Uptown Services , LLC
3
0
a
m
E
�a
a
Packet Pg . 83
1 . 2
_
�a
E
m
City of
0
, Fort Collins U
Needs Are Being Met
SL
CU
Q
D
Fiber Available
a
U
Have Fiber
L
Cn
Dedicated Connection =
Yes
Have Redundancy 0°
■ N o
M
Have Unmet Needs
0
Under Contract N
L
Q
Will Consider the City o
L
3
0
a
m
E
Ca
a
Packet Pg . 84
1 . 2
_
ca
E
m
City of
0
, Fort CollinsNow
Internet Value
Y
sL
CU
Q
Minimum Price ( in USD ) Per Mbps Download
United States $ 0 . 59 as Published by the OECD, September 2014 a
U
L
Cn
Fort Collins DSL $ 1 . 85 CU
0
ML
W
Fort Collins Cable $ 0 . 60
Modem
0
ca
_
a�
Longmont L
NextLight $ 0 . 05 Q
_
'o
CL
L
$ $ 0 . 20 $0 .40 $ 0 . 60 $0 . 80 $ 1 . 00 $1. 20 $ 1 .40 $ 1 . 60 $ 1 . 80 $ 2 . 00 3
0
a
m
E
ca
a
Packet Pg . 85
1 . 2
_
a
E
m
City of
0
, Fort CollinsPON c Oto U i izen Ad � Hoc Committee
m
ca
Eighteen citizens representing a variety of geography, skill and
user level , and overall broadband interest . ,
L
This group has been engaged to : CU
WO
• Review and discuss materials provided by City staff and Uptown Services o
m
• Help staff design communications for the broader public
M
• Be a liaison to the public regarding current process , engagement opportunities ,
and to share questions
_
L
Q
Staff anticipates convening the group meeting about every six weeks =
Q
throughout 2016 . o
a
m
E
Ca
a
Packet Pg . 86
1 . 2
_
a
E
m
City of
0
Fort Collins Review
Y L
CU
Expert Panel
la
Q
Purpose of the Expert Review Panel :
a
• Provide independent , expert technical review during the development of the
broadband plan so that critical questions are posed and assessed .
Cn
• Review and discuss documents by City staff and Uptown Services to ensure
that the project ' s feasibility, sufficiency in information collected , and 0
0
communication needs are being addressed . Go
M
v
_
Time Commitment — at least three times in 2016
_
1st meeting — May 2 , 2016
_.o
L
3
0
a
m
E
Ca
a
Packet Pg . 87
1 . 2
_
a
E
m
City of
0
Fort Collins Review
Y L
CU
Expert Panelists
la
Lev Gonick
_
• Chief Executive Officer, OneCommunity a
• Founding member, GigU
L
Rob Houlihan
CU
• Chief Technology Officer, Cedar Falls Utilities
Ma
Blair Levin
• Senior Fellow at Brookings Institute M
• Served as Executive Director of the Federal Communications Commission ' s 2009 National Broadband
Plan , and as Chief of Staff for the FCC 1993 - 1997
Deb Socia
L
• Executive Director, Next Century Cities
_
'o
L
3
0
a
_
m
E
ca
a
Packet Pg . 88
1 . 2
_
�a
E
m
City of
0
, Fort Collins Y L
/ • Timeline
Formation of Council Work Council Work Council D
Expert Review Session 4/26 Session 8/23 Recommendation Sessionrm
AR 7a
' MAYAUGOCTNOV ai
a�
�a
L
Citizen Ad-Hoc I i +'
_
Asset Report
fC
0
Broadband ! StandardsMarket m
o�
Demand Surveys
v
Feasibility
_
0
SWOT
i +
_
Revised U)
a�
Expert Review Broadband Recommendation RecI 1 . 1 Q
_
'o
Community • . ' Q
L
3
0
a
m
E
la
a
Packet Pg . 89
1 . 2
c
�a
E
m
City of
0
, Fort Collins U Questions ?
CU
a
U
or ai
a�
�a
L
CU
0
ML
W
v
0
N
L
Q
.O
Q
L
3
0
a
m
E
Ca
a
Packet Pg . 90
DATE : April 26 , 2016
STAFF : Cameron Gloss , Planning Manager WORK SESSION ITEM
City Council
SUBJECT FOR DISCUSSION
Mountain Vista Area Open Lands Preservation Scenario .
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
The purpose of this item is to evaluate an open land preservation scenario for the Mountain Vista area that
maintains the area ' s overall projected jobs and housing , but configures future development patterns to conserve
more land for local food production , access to nature , and innovative housing opportunities .
GENERAL DIRECTION SOUGHT AND SPECIFIC QUESTIONS TO BE ANSWERED
What is the best way to implement the Mountain Vista Open Lands Preservation vision ?
BACKGROUND / DISCUSSION
At the June 9 , 2015 Work Session , where staff presented the pros and cons of reducing housing and employment
intensity within the Mountain Vista area through an alternative " Rural Scenario" , City Council requested a second
phase of analysis , including outreach to Mountain Vista property owners and the public , to determine a revised
possible future vision . Council specifically requested that the second phase address the following issues :
• Application of new policy initiatives such as Nature in the City, Urban Agriculture and the Housing Affordability
Policy Study that have occurred since the Mountain Vista Subarea Plan was adopted ;
• Partnership opportunities among property owners and with the City to provide infrastructure improvements ;
and
• Promote innovative community design principles that represent best practices in housing design ,
neighborhood livability, and the integration of agriculture and natural systems .
Public outreach was conducted with this second phase of the assessment primarily through a multi-day design
charrette (see Attachment 1 for the Charrette Summary) . The charrette identified opportunities and constraints
for the area , project goals and how to meet them at the regional , community and neighborhood scales . Two
major framework plans were generated : "Access to Nature" , and " Living Corridor" . It was the latter framework that
garnered the most support from charrette participants and that was carried forward with a more detailed
illustrative plan that expanded on major design concepts (Attachment 2 ) .
Overall , the land use concept connects agriculture , parks , open space , and wildlife habitat through a large green
swath of open lands running parallel along the No . 8 Ditch and near existing and planned regional stormwater
detention areas . The concept provides for water detention/filtration while maintaining food production in proximity
to clustered housing , offices , shops , parks , schools , and light industrial uses . Because the multi -use corridor is
centrally located within Mountain Vista , the trail and open space network links the area to local food production ,
such as greenhouses , a community kitchen and farmer' s market.
The design exercise was intended to provide a framework that will aid in creating an urban agricultural landscape
that promotes ecological biodiversity, access to nature for residents , and open land systems integration , i . e . ,
stormwater detention , parks , community agriculture , or natural areas within shared or abutting spaces .
Packet Pg . 91
April 26 , 2016 Page 2
Agricultural concepts shown do not rely on traditional agricultural practices that cover a large land area , but on
more intensive methods such as :
• Small farms of less than 5 acres
• Mini or micro farming on 1 acre or less
community gardens
• backyard farming
• edible landscaping
greenhouse farming
Creating networks of greenways that spur off of the primary open space framework creates networks for informal
recreation , exercise and enjoyment of nature , in addition to the opportunity for small -scale agriculture . In between
these "fingers" of open space are clustered residential neighborhoods and employment areas that connect and
provide a unifying element between a rural and urban landscape .
Next Steps
In high land value communities like Fort Collins that have intense development pressures (as opposed to low land
value communities like Detroit and Cleveland ) , urban agriculture and natural habitat needs to be more creatively
integrated into the landscape . Case studies of similar communities have shown that publicly-held land such as
stormwater detention areas , parks , schools and privately-held land needs to be integrated in order to provide a
diversity of urban agriculture types at different scales .
The City amended its supplementary regulations of the Land Use Code in 2013 to allow for a range of urban
agricultural activities at a level and intensity that is compatible with the City' s residential neighborhoods and non -
residential areas ; however, these Code changes alone may not result in the open lands preservation scenario
depicted . Staff is considering that the following implementation measures for Mountain Vista that would also be
applicable to other developing areas of the community:
• Analysis - more thorough review of existing LUC standards
• Integration of Capital Improvements related to stormwater and parks
• Revisit street standard designs to promote rural character
• Design Guidelines based on best practices for innovative housing , urban agriculture and habitat preservation
• Partnerships ( public agencies , private developers , CSAs)
ATTACHMENTS
1 . Mountain Vista Charrette Summary: Cultivating Community ( PDF )
2 . Mountain Vista Open Lands Preservation Illustrative Plan ( PDF )
3 . Work Session Summary, June 9 , 2015 ( PDF )
4 . PowerPoint Presentation ( PDF )
Packet Pg . 92
ATTACHMENT 1 2 ' 1
0
•L
V
Mountain Vista Subarea
0
Urban Agriculture Charrette Outcomes : N
L
a
Cultivating Community
J
C
W
Q
0
M
d
C
7
X=
00
O M
V EC
ati
o
U
c
<a
February 2015
A summary of findings in stakeholder interviews, in - house charrettes, and public involvement
events exploring the possibilities for the integration of urban agricultural elements in the
Mountain Vista Subarea Plan prepared for the City of Fort Collins by Logan Simpson
c
0
a�
E
M
a
Packet Pg . 93
2 . 1
O
Introduction
The Mountain Vista Subarea is the final frontier in northeast Fort Collins, encompassing Cn
more than 3 , 000 acres bordered by Richards Lake Road to the north, Interstate 25 to the o
P
east, Vine Drive to the south, and Turnberry Road and Lemay Avenue to the west.
Historically agricultural in use, much of the subarea remains undeveloped, with the
exception of five residential neighborhoods and the Anheuser- Busch InBev (ABI) brewery. a
In November 2015 , the City conducted a 2 - day workshop with City staff and two public J
meetings to explore alternative development scenarios for this area, considering existing
City plans, allowable development under the current zoning code, case studies from other p
communities, and interviews with area stakeholders . This document summarizes related
plans, allowable development under the current zoning code, case studies from other
communities, and interviews with area stakeholders . The purpose of the study was to :
• Apply Nature in the City goals, Urban Agriculture regulations, and the Housing
Affordability Policy Study that have occurred since the Mountain Vista Subarea Plan c
was adopted.
00
• Identify partnership opportunities among property owners and the City to provide M
needed transportation, storm drainage, and other public infrastructure
improvements .
• Consider innovative community design principles that represent best practices in E
housing design, neighborhood livability, and the integration of agriculture and v
natural systems . _
• Ensure the alignment of any new agricultural or horticultural design and cc
development initiatives with zoning regulation and stay within the definition of
Urban Agriculture . v
L
cu
E
E
co
a�
a�
L
L
(U
N
_
_
7
O
_
d
E
t
U
MOUNTAIN VISTA4r— m
Packet Pg . 94
2 . 1
Background o
i
Development of Mountain Vista is guided by a number of existing plans and regulations .
U
Cn
Mountain Vista Subarea Plan, 2009 a
The Mountain Vista Subarea Plan, originally adopted in March 1999, and subsequently
updated in September 2009, provides a community development framework for the area, N
including a future land use plan and new road alignments shown on the following page. It is a
important that any new design ideas balance residential, employment, commercial, civic,
and open lands uses, including recreation facilities, parks, trails, and natural areas, in
_
conjunction with the current goals and vision set for the subarea, which states : a
0
" Mountain Vista is intended to be an integral part of Fort Collins, functioning as an
L
extension of the greater community. This subarea will be known for its impressive views of Q
the mountains and recognized for its successful and innovative community design . This y
subarea will be distinct and attractive with a comfortable, town -like atmosphere that c
residents and businesses identify with and take pride in. Neighborhoods, industrial uses,
open space, natural areas, agriculture, parks, schools, a shopping district and business C
2
centers within this subarea will be connected and served by multi- modal connections 00
including vehicle, transit, bicycle, and pedestrian modes . Key components of the area will V)
be the integration of new housing types, agriculture and open spaces into future
development. "
E
City Plan, 2011 0
City Plan, the Comprehensive Plan for Fort Collins, was last updated in 2011 and includes a,
several relevant goals for the subarea, including maintaining a rural and agricultural edge
to the community and supporting local and regional food production, while protecting Y
riparian areas and open space to sustain watersheds, wildlife habitat, and natural areas . v
L
Urban Agriculture, 2013 E
Since 2013 , the City has adopted a number of regulations related to urban agriculture in an y
effort to implement four City Plan goals related to local food production . The City' s Land
Use Code now allows urban agriculture in all zone districts and farmers markets in more L
zone districts than before . The City Code' s animal husbandry policies are also more v
permissible, including basing the number of chickens per property on the lot size, allowing
N
ducks and goats, and updated beekeeping practices . >
_
Nature in the City Strategic Plan, 2015
Adopted in March 2015 , the Nature in the City program envisions " a connected open space
network accessible to the entire community that provides a variety of experiences and
functional habitat for people, plants, and wildlife . " The plan seeks to ensure every resident E
is within a 10 - minute walk to nature from their home or workplace. U
Q
Packet Pg . 95
2 . 1
I ' `• v
u
�' La *wU U yzoe
,
'1 `z State Land m
Board (City (L
Conservation
\ - - � •- •- •- •� � Easement) C
, �• ` N•M/ Edor � �
"Ito� S•LM.■m ..r�I Q
i L�
I tal • � � � C
1 1 O
S,.—•/ \ •` .. a pr
00
Silt • '`'� 1••A J• r
`� � • • I�roRLm
t■ , M
1 �
a% I TWO
IF
■ \ ` 1
J
i . / ■ .�
• . . � � �JaLJa1Ja1�aY •uti �.. �. �.Iaf(LLLLLL� _ p'
1
1 1 / UOPa
tc
00110110
� — — • t 1 1
1
L
i • U
M
M y is +'
�.. �twam rrr INtch ! ( :ity limits •[Iran%itir•n l �.atriCt A >
I �kc Land Use law,• Iknstq• \Iivcd UscNcighbl •rNxKI c
✓J� �urrmaatar ulluum ( :• ,m n nuul \ladturr Density NGxtd l •.1 Ntighluorh/ ■KI
( ;, ,n Iktcntn .n
de, hutun Rua,1x I ?mrknmint Park p
- IrEllustnal Site
SStt' ( )d & Gas Nuffcr �
tome ( hl & ( ia.+ Buffer tt
�a
MOUNTAIN VISTA
a
Packet Pg . 96
2 . 1
Existing Conditions .0
ma"ft4ai.« bj Mm .. - - M
U
La..d Ow+�t�i4u p Ewi stu+y Agru ul fu raL Usty Topogra y Cl)
I C
'iill 1�- p \ N
C �F� .� J
-
_ . ,
Q
O
d
L
N
C
O
Land Ownership
00
A few major landowners control the majority of the subarea, the largest of which is V)
M
Anheuser- Busch InBev (ABI ) with 986 acres of land in the northeast section of the subarea.
The Poudre R- 1 School District owns several acres on the west side of the subarea that
could be developed into a school campus, depending on educational needs in the area. E
E
Existing Land Uses c°�
The Anheuser- Busch Brewery occupies the northeast portion of the subarea, though much =
of its property remains farmland. Approximately 1,490 acres, or 48 % of the subarea, is >
currently used as agriculture . Several areas have already been converted to residential
developments . These include Maple Hill Subdivision, Storybrook Subdivision, Waterfield v
Subdivision, Trailhead Subdivision, and Waterglen Subdivision. L
E
Topography & Drainage ;
co
There is very little slope within the subarea. The west side drains into Richard' s Lake, Long
Pond, and Lindenmaier Lake . The south and east sides of the subarea drain south into the L
Upper Cooper Slough and to the east side of I - 2S . Current or planned detention areas are
shown with a hatch in each of the maps, above. v
N
Oil & Gas Wells >
The oil and gas buffer shown in each of the maps is illustrated at 3S0 ' and 1000 ' . The Code
prohibits development within 3SO ' of a drilled and capped oil or gas well and requires
notification for development within the 1000 ' buffer.
a�
E
U
4 MOUNTAIN VISTA
Packet Pg . 97
2 . 1
Future Conditions 10
When the Mountain Vista Subarea is
entirely developed, it will include ...... - N
approximately 26, 618 employees and } c
9, 539 households, based on existing °°`""' ""` "
zoning. To accommodate future - K•- N
development, several roadway
DrY• vd '.wY+
improvements and additions will be M"se "-`
needed, as shown on the map on page 3 . oil,
Within the initial plans for the subarea, a
a sketch was created for the mixed-use L
commercial center to illustrate scale,
anticipated uses, parking, and
viewsheds, as shown at right and ■ %=- _
below.
■ —� O
00
c`')
7
E
E
O
- - U
Ira
sir r— 1,4
40
R �' �► �lr 1
.G16r '
PP
4 , �' `" \r � r \ '• ate'.[
it r F
1
1 a+
Q
Packet Pg . 98
2 . 1
Future opportunities for land conservation and trails have also been identified for this area o
L
based on ditches, floodplains, and existing city- owned property. Those opportunities are c
numbered on the map below and listed below. N
1 . State Land Board Property (Sod Farm) Future Detention Pond - Could be used for
other uses such as a natural area.
as
a�
2 . Number Eight Ditch - Restore channel to appear more like a natural stream to a
improve the aesthetics, habitat, wildlife corridor, and safety. Construct a regional
trail along the improved channel, and create an outdoor classroom on the future
school community park sites . a
0
CU
3 . Consider purchasing land north of community park site for a natural area. 2
a
4. Future Trail Connection to Future Neighborhood Park Site - Connect a number of y
future and existing neighborhoods to the regional trail along the Number Eight =
Ditch. Wait for development to build trail and grant access .
0
S . Regional Trail - Construct trail through future park and development.
00
6 . Waterfield Development Future Natural Area - Acquire and develop site . Work with V)
Transportation regarding the realignment of Vine Drive . PSD wants to sell their
future school site, which was intended to be a park/school site . Most of the site is
south of the realigned Vine Drive . On hold waiting for development and Vine Drive E
E
relocation. 0
(U
7 . East Ridge Development - Barker Property/ Gravel Pit - Future Neighborhood Park,
cc
stormwater detention pond, and natural area. Park will likely acquire site for park,
potential for dedication by future development. v
L
cu
8 . Cooper Slough - likely work with developers to protect buffers along slough and E
provide regional trail corridor. Trail likely to cross Mulberry at signalized crossing.
co
Culvert under Mulberry is needed for stormwater flows and wildlife movement.
a�
L
11 . Dry Creek - potential trial, stream restoration/natural area restoration, future
neighborhood park/natural area, and flood control channel. v
N
12 . Neighborhood Park/natural area - potential to conserve land around park site .
13 . Storm drainage channel - potential for stream restoration versus a pipe .
0
2
16 . Future Detention Ponds - Storm Water will work with developers to create the
ponds and wildlife habitat.
E
U
6 MOUNTAIN VISTA
Packet Pg . 99
2 . 1
I�
WIT
I •L
y
7 O
' a
a �
Q
O
7 a
I It
c
00
a s •
- -1►' t6 `
- - - - - - - - - . ' o
U
. Yry �I►w a .. - - . . �. . C
113
l ' * >
t h
tt r
is
Floodplaln * Future Park Open Spaces Stormmter Master Plan }'
Paved rrarl —I Vaunt Lards Curverts
O
,.� Natural Surface Trill Ensmq Parks ----- Channels City of
a.r...w.r.. c ....,
PMpps,d Ty Cdr%wrvabon Easemems Ppea Fort Collins
•�••�•••�•••"•��"••••• OCay Lands Natural An:asDetentes Ponds �' \
ar�ssaalrl
Schools W
Potential Partnership Area NE Quad E
��� .�. ..,,•,.�^ Potential Partnership Area lOeror Cuadl
PnmM O� 0e 7013MOUNTAIN VISTA
�
a
Packet Pg . 100
2 . 1
Case Studies o
'i
To get a sense for how to integrate nature and urban agriculture in future Mountain Vista
developments, this study considered regional, community, and neighborhood scale case N
studies . At the regional scale, food produced onsite serves the area beyond the boundaries C
P
of the development. At the community scale, the agricultural uses are prominent and serve
the development. At the smallest or neighborhood scale, there are pocket elements of
i
agriculture the size of backyards, community gardens, and CSA ( Community Supported a
Agriculture) plots .
�a
J
Regional Scale a
From left to right, the following thumbnail illustrations represent Serenbe in Atlanta, O
Georgia; Honeywood Farm in Barnsville, Georgia; and Imperial Farm and Garden in Sugar Q
Land, Texas . 2
N
C
.7
SERENBE COMMUNITY MASTERPLAN rr. *�- — 0
W N i...,
°°
SIL
1# ow�J,
ALE
.. 3
+r + • .. � �, w - E
F"ASE IV
A HONEYWOOD FARM
o >
me
Flew
olf
Lim
I U
MADO HAMLET - • GRANGE HAMLET I memo
uyn ,.. -1 I 1 � r N� FARM HUB 2
rM
Fro` IML�
Irk
E
t
U
M
Q
MOUNTAIN
Packet Pg . 101
2 . 1
Community Scale o
•L
At the community scale, the 1 , 150 - acre Harvest development in Argyle, Texas, incorporates =
a�
a 5 -acre farm and community gardens among 3 , 200 single - family homes (top photos) . In N
Fort Collins, the 160 - acre Bucking Horse development includes 2 historic farms, a 2 . 5 - acre c
farm for community supported agriculture, and 1 , 100 single- and multi -family homes .
as
CL
a�
L
a
y
J
f + • t
�=ice•- � -. L-- _ _
L
� - -
N
7
O
00
' 11 N' • '1'+ I i^+
ti ■■ 7
i ,-I• �^ _ r. #� -uy E
O
U
c
Neighborhood Scale
At the neighborhood scale, the 100 - acre Cannery community in Davis, California, provides a
7 .4 - acre farm with a barn, cold storage, and equipment shed to serve 547 single - and multi - E
family homes . y
a�
at.r
a�
L
L
d-y• ' � _ a ` • • ,
dd
y E
V
MOUNTAIN VIST4,L=
Packet Pg . 102
2. 1
Opportunities o
L
Opportunities for integration of agricultural, natural, and community design elements at
the regional, community, and neighborhood level were voted on at both days of the staff can
rm
workshop and at the public open house events . The most popular opportunities by scale 0
are listed below with the number of votes in blue .
as
Regional Scale a
• Variety of housing types (8) • Diversity in dwelling styles, colors, a
rm
• Urban farming as buffers (7) materials, building footprint sizes
• Well placed open space - (4)
CL
integration of formal and informal • Integration of a higher percentage p
landscape space at various scales of community gardens/plots,
throughout the development rooftop gardens, and aquaponics (3 )
pattern (6) • Larger scale urban farming
• Water conservation and Low Impact operations interspersed with =
Design techniques (6) industrial uses (3 ) _
0
Community Scale
• Walking distance- close proximity • Food trail (4) M
to goods & services, employment, • Natural trail landscaped with native
and recreation ( 14) fruits and nuts (4) �
• Locate shopping and grocery near Trail through a linear farming area '
E
homes (8) (4) E
• Integration with healthy V
communities and active living (5 )
Neighborhood Scale
• Incorporation of alternative • Varied edge patterns - lot spacing, a
development patterns that build on open space form, building setbacks, M
E
the "complete neighborhood" model buffer patterns, trail/walk patterns E
with a unique urban/rural ( 11) co
m
character. This could be smaller • Maintain views of nature from
L
housing, ADU's, community space, homes and businesses (9)
alternative street designs/patterns, • Capitalize on open space corridors V
possibly larger block sizes, longer along the No. 8 Ditch to connect n
walkway spines, increased setbacks parks and trails (8)
in some areas, and/or smaller • Naturalize and utilize storm
setbacks. ( 17) drainage as a visual asset (5) 00
_
m
E
10 MOUNTAIN VISTA
Packet Pg . 103
2 . 1
Concepts o
'i
Illustrations of concepts developed during the charrette helped to determine how some of
the opportunities could be incorporated into the subarea to create a mosaic of natural N
areas and agricultural uses within residential and commercial development. 0
as
The first concept is an external agricultural scenario illustrating i
larger patches of agricultural lands bordering residential ,
, . development and incorporating easy access from residential to
natural areas . J
_
a�
a
0
The next concept shows an internal agricultural scenario with L
farmlands surrounded by residential development creating easy
access to a central food corridor internally and natural areas outside
of residential development.
i r• i f+
0
The final hybrid concept illustrates how residential development can 11
be surrounded by agriculture and natural areas . M
The drawings below show how food production can be incorporated in community E
E
development at the smallest scale, including alley gardens where households can grow food 0
in communal spaces behind their homes, median gardens where the space between traffic =
lanes can be cultivated, vertical gardens that are space efficient, and in front yards .
U
E
o E
o E• a
7
co
® N
tv
000
e U
, moo � 3 y
° f .
tv
0
� GLIM6IN(�
00 D G ►
t
Imp" V
MOUNTAIN VISTA 112
Packet Pg . 104
2 . 1
O
�L
Oplaoa
• 1 w • fC
�L7/Tf_ c
V
O
L
a
N
o �
e �
�. • GoMMUN / Tr J
e 56P�1+7Z7� �
CL
• '�� O
�s f°W
L
Q
N
� Wyl )
• (NN, o �/.JJl�YJ4s6 �
0 00
! Deco
• • ° • 0 0 M
O 0 MOM
1 O • %,M,M'
• o GLUSTeJZ • I
x4v
` sow
07
42p MIN
I ° • O o
? • o • .
'-- 7 c o • o
a
0
VA
c
..ftM"I%MI
.01
1 �
0
A. . �. .. u.. • .....rwi-' ..... •.r r ..._ yr. ,.. . � .._. � _ �qM.+.d :,, � . . . ..... . . ........ I• C
y 1I . . .V.Y. - I.Y * norti� ao c.— Y.rJ.r. 1r/l�f.�..•Y/� fY..� f.v.•. .1. I . lW.I�I �f
Y. Y - M ..�..�� .♦ M ....r.�. .�f 4WI N . .
fY � � IJ�I eI Irf�/1. �.Ilol•GY I.r
V
a
Packet Pg . 105
2 . 1
Framework Plans 10
After considering opportunities at a number of scales, conceptual framework plans were
developed that incorporate some of the topics discussed above . N
O
Framework A: Living Corridor
The Living Corridor Scenario connects agriculture through the Mountain Vista Subarea via N
the No . 8 Ditch and allows food production to be intensively cultivated in the floodplain . a
This green arterial links the proposed north and south detention areas with a riparian
corridor that offers a variety of parks, open space, and wildlife habitat nestled within farms .
_
This concept provides for water detention and filtration while maintaining agricultural a
uses in proximity to clustered housing, offices, shops, parks, schools, and light industrial O
uses . Because the multiuse corridor is centrally located, all trails and open spaces provide Q
a high level of accessibility to agritourism and local food businesses, such as greenhouses,
educational campuses, a community kitchen, and a farmer' s market.
.�
iiiiii V77akv „y` AALVW�T *Jill
pGMO
ra O
INSPIRE
vi 00
Jill
y l
M
® 6� E
dd fl.C�R'A&S 0
i46&^f1iVTcfde
.Sta,�s/TitGL .
4c*4z- X;Nwi/Ar-5r, AEMcNbTRkT
Jill
U
L
G� YELC3� 3'/EGT�.e ELTJill 1111111111111111111111,11L7
Ld/L✓�LIFi �i1�7�)T�Gp E
� ,, VIP
a�
07
11AAMI�tT� A N9.�'E GLGST��
�a4 Sepr� A 1D GaMM �� a�
Q
Jill MOUNTAIN ,
Packet Pg . 106
2 . 1
o_
l f
1'
I/ C OF
4f ko (1)
A+# A TNT
. v V
o s �
o
� S/NG �
i W
ar_`� IGPjyTG2 I CaQ/4 � Q ter, . �iSTI�/ TiGiv
�L�4KE o
o '
o w+►j I �
co
i �� /oI • o \ '�
,tor
° \
. o
'3 .0 d%oj
Aefo
PIS
VIA *40
_ �. ° ° o
y. o
°
A T[J 24& ° fn
c °
a o
- — o
N�T�-
a .. o
I �
d
E
t�
14 MOUNTAIN VISTA
cv
a
Packet Pg . 107
2 . 1
Framework B : Access to Nature o
'i
The second plan scenario has more of a mosaic approach to integrating agriculture with =
a�
residential and commercial development with more programmed single family N
development types including senior housing, tiny homes, and an agricultural based c
community. This plan includes social nodes where food cultivation can be an interactive
social area highlighting easy access for all generations and ability levels . This plan features N
a�
transit stops with different prominent themes, and ensures that all land uses are accessible a
within one half mile of the central hub . This scenario makes natural areas such as the new
_
southern lakes and interconnected nature trails highly accessible from anywhere in the
subarea. It illustrates how a hybrid of community uses can all be integrated including a
housing, transit, community centers, schools, commercial uses, trails and natural areas, O
parks, and agriculture . Figure H illustrates how community food cultivation could occur on Q
a linear pathway instead of a gathering node . A food trail might consist of native foods
N
growing naturally as well as CSAs or small farm stands selling fresh produce . >
0
CO
f E
E
EQ.lTX1�/�!L o _ U
® ai
Y
v,..r.� M
>
H�FTL�.4L �Icl� U
6C�ss/Gl7@ Lago M
47
�1? p E
O
� � ✓ � ate+
'e 49
0
17
Ti4/N'�.�✓T � , T�✓�S �
N.BT�i/CYgi� �;
_
/bP��i4�i1bLE E
Q
Packet Pg . 108
2 . 1
Updated Goals for the Mountain Vista Subarea 10
cc
Input from stakeholder interviews, staff workshops, and public meetings were integrated
with the goals and policies from related City plans to formulate the following goals, which N
are listed in order of popularity based on the cumulative votes received from the staff 0
P
workshops and public meetings (in blue) . The top goals include incorporation of balanced �
development with open space, agriculture, trails and/or sidewalks, transportation
L
improvements, wildlife habitat, and community facilities . a
1 . Conserve, create and enhance natural spaces and agricultural areas with easy, J
walkable access to provide diverse social and ecological opportunities . ( 20 )
a
0
2 . Develop partnerships among property owners and the City to provide needed
L
transportation, storm drainage, open space, natural areas and other public Q
infrastructure improvements . ( 19 ) n
3 . Incorporate alternative development patterns that build on the "complete Y
neighborhood" model with a unique urban/rural character. ( 18) c
4. Provide a balanced system of recreation facilities, parks, trails, natural areas, and 00
open lands . ( 15 )
M
S . Expand and enhance transit system to serve the area. ( 14)
E
6 . The Mountain Vista sub - area will have a balance of residential, employment, E
0
commercial, civic, and open lands uses . ( 14) v
ai
7 . Use innovative community design principles that represent best practices in cc
housing design, neighborhood form, housing affordability, neighborhood livability,
and the integration of agriculture, community gardens, greenhouses, commercial v
gardens, private gardens, larger agricultural operations, and natural systems . ( 12 ) cu
E
8 . Provide a connected agricultural and open space network accessible to the entire co
community that provides a variety of experiences and functional habitat for people, Y
a�
plants and wildlife . (9 ) L
�a
9 . Encourage urban agriculture and local food production to improve availability and
accessibility of healthy foods, and to provide other educational, economic, and social
benefits building off the existing zoning framework. ( 7)
10 . Develop partnership with groups such as Gardens on Spring Creek, Poudre School 0
District, Coalition for Activity and Nutrition to Defeat Obesity, farmers markets,
Community Supported Agriculture programs (CSAs) , and others, as well as
E
supporting the development of a potential year-round community marketplace . ( 5l U
16 MOUNTAIN VISTA
Packet Pg . 109
i
, i
i
i
' i
i
J �
.1 l. '
la. 440
14 lie
1 I _ I 11 — 1 rro va7e�9 — I 1 '�• I
ATTACHMENT 3 2 . 3
City Of Planning, Development & Transportation
Fort Collins281 North College Avenue
P.O. Box 580
Fort Collins, CO 80522.0580
970.221 .6376
970.224.6134 - fax
O
L
MEMORANDUM =
m
U
DATE: June 12, 2015 N
O
TO : Mayor Troxell and City Councilmembers
m
THRU : Darin Atteberry, City Managers
Jeff Mihelich, Deputy City Managers if a
Laurie Kadrich, Director of Planning, evelopment & Transportation'
�a
J
FROM: Cameron Gloss, Planning Manager
�� a
RE : Work Session Summary — June 9, 2025 re: Mountain Vista Subarea Plan Assessment
of Alternative Rural Scenario
a
Attendees: y
Cameron Gloss presented results from the assessment of an alternative Rural Scenario to the Mountain =
Vista Subarea Plan and responded to questions from Council. All City Council members were present Y
(Mayor Troxell via telephone conference). c
Specific Question to be Answered by City Council : 00
Should staff move into a second phase of the analysis, including outreach to Mountain Vista property M
owners and the public?
Lo
Discussion Summary N
■ The majority of Council members did not support the Alternative Rural Scenario. Q'
m
■ Recognition was given to the substantial thought and effort that went into the Mountain Vista
Subarea Plan (both the original and amended versions).
■ Most Council members suggested that the rural alternative did not meet the City's Climate
Action Plan and affordable housing goals. E
■ Council suggested a preference for further area property owner outreach should it be E
accommodated through the project budget. co
■ Suggestion was made that further analysis of alternative growth patterns might help the City c
understand the gaps in the current Mountain Vista Plan both from a design and financial
standpoint. co
L
O
Follow-up Items:
Council requested that staff work with area property owners to better understand community
development in the Mountain Vista Area and report back to Council on results of the outreach effort.
E
Specific areas to be addressed within the outreach :
M
■ Application of new policy initiatives such as Nature in the City, Urban Agriculture and the Q
Housing Affordability Policy Study that have occurred since the Mountain Vista Subarea was
adopted.
1
Packet Pg . 111
2 .3
of
blons
■ Partnership opportunities among property owners and with the City to provide infrastructure
improvements.
■ Promote innovative community design principles that represent best practices in housing c
design, neighborhood livability, and the integration of agriculture and natural systems.
m
U
Cn
rm
s'
m
m
L
a
�a
J
_
N
Q
0
N
L
a
N
_
_
7
O
O
M
LO
TOM
N
O
N
_
7
7
L
M
E
E
7
CO
_
O
.y
N
d
CO
Y
L
O
_
E
V
Q
June 9, 2015 Council Work Session Summary Page 2
Mountain Vista Alternative Scenario update
June 12, 2015
Packet Pg . 112
ATTACHMENT 4 2 .4
O
.L
CU
a
U
Cn
a
City • • / • O
� +
Fort Collins
t/1
L
a
Cn
�a
J
C
Q
0
� L
a
U)
O
00
44*
O
ca
a
4)
Cn
N
L
a
.o
Mountain Vista :
a
Open Lands Preservationa>
3
O
a
c
a�
E
U
fU
Q
Packet Pg . 113
CU
r.
Cn
r.
City of 0
Fort Collins
a.
Mountain Vista : Subarea OvervieCID
w
Cn
.�. s1 .
• ' ' I 3 . .
Boundary 0
Growth
Management
ro ;
1rea 1
Ili t
Boundary
.I
•
*)rsolto Rd
. ■
City Limits
` - -
1
• � q •
Cn
U.
■
i •
t ■
---
Packet
2
. g
2 .4
O
�L
CU
a
V
City of NOW
, Fort CollinsNow
M
i
Subarea Context
N
O
L
a
• 2 , 989 Total acres
G . M . A. 1 , 298 acres - Low Density Mixed Use o
b " LMN Neighborhood
g ( ) Q
i 144 acres - Medium Density Mixed
Use Neighborhood ( MMN ) o
Y cc�
\ i G
660 acres - Employment ( 65 % ) M
• 450 acres - Industrial ( 50 % )
Al
�. 400 acres - Open land , community L
a
park and school site
a
L
d
O
a
c
a�
E
U
f�
Q
Packet Pg . 115
2 .4
O
�L
CU
a
V
City of NOW
, Fort CollinsOz
i
Plan Background
L
a
. .:,: Framework Plan J
� ... . . wm
Mountain Vista s: a
SUBAREA PLAN O
is
m
L
a
Update N
CD
00
M
1999 12008 - 2009 2009 2015 0
Framework Plan Plan Update Plan Update Rural Scenario
Adopted Adopted Assessment L
a
.o
a
L
d
O
a
c
a�
E
M
tU
tE
Q
Packet Pg . 116
2 .4
O
L
CU
_
U
City of NOW
nz
,� tCollins RuralOWN
M
i
Summary : Scenario Assessment N
O
L
a
J
_
Greater agricultural production within the City Housing Becomes Less Affordable o
L
Fewer collector streets constructed Increased VMT and congestion on City streets
Fewer City services and programs needed Substantial Increase in Regional Green
House Gas Emissions o
Greater potential to enhance natural habitat Loss of Street Oversizing Fees to cover costs
of regionally- induced transportation impacts
_
Insufficient density to support transit
_
Stranded assets - arterial streets & school site L
a
Substantial Loss in Job Opportunities a.
L
d
O
a
_
a
E
M
U
f
Q
Packet Pg . 117
2 .4
0
L
CU
a
U
0
— � 0 oil CU
—
d
Environmental Economic Social
L
a
Decrease in Mountain Vista Vehicle Decrease - Housing affordability Decrease in potential Mountain Vista Cn
rm
Miles Travelled (VMT) and range of housing types population
Significant loss of jobs within Affordable housing land supply Q
Increase in regional VMT industrial I employment lands shifts to outside of City °
L
z Many planned transportation and Higher housing prices within the Q
CO a emissions -- Regional increase
at 2040 of 94 metric tons stormwater improvements still City ; increased pressure on existing
needed neighborhoods
CO2e emissions -- Mountain Vista Decrease — fees collected for Greater traffic on local roads due to
0
decrease of 15 metric tons general services associated regional traffic increase
Increase -- regional air pollution with Fewer City services and programs Lack of transit opportunity linking M
net VMT needed in Subarea Mountain Vista to central Fort Collins
rm
0
Decrease -- solid waste generated Reduction — sales and property tax No Community Park site or
revenues recreation center 0)
Increase -- Large farming tracts + - 50 % of acquired PSD school site Lost opportunity for expanded trail a
remains Habitat preservation becomes a stranded asset networks o
a
61
Potential Increase -- oil and gas Lost opportunity to restore I enhance
interest habitat with development a
E
U
fU
Q
Packet Pg . 118
2 .4
0
�L
CO
a
U
O
ID.i
y COJ.M1 MMr YO
At
1 • i L
a.
L,.i • . . • . - . • • Ail
• • 1 � 1
M1 a ..
L
'4,1
>
• rrro c'ro 0 0
till awr O
rill n12L
00
ram' - r
K,
M
' Y.t 1... a.
r� �,. -, -�. o
`I ipil - _ Interstate Cities Rivers Mae
_ r•
L L Highway Subregion Lakes
Local Road Mountain Vista c
-' - i f Subarea Plan
r- Railroad c
c
a�
a.
U
f0
little
Packet Pg . 119
2 .4
O
L
CU
a
V
City of o
, Fort Collins nz
Form i
Direction • • • y
L
a
Cn
Ma
rM
• Further property owner outreach
• Specific topics to be incorporated : CU
i
a
CU
• Nature in the City N
• Urban Agriculture
O
• Housing Affordability Policy Study
M
• Investigate partnership opportunities for infrastructure improvements
• Promote innovative community design principles that enhance Cn
livability and integrate agricultural and natural systems
.o
a
L
d
O
a
c
a
E
M
tU
f�
Q
Packet Pg . 120
2 .4
O
�L
CU
_
OEM Cn
City of o
, Fort Collins
D es '
.• ••
N
O
L
a
Cn
Ma
_
• 58 attendees over a two - day charrette ( Nov 2 and 3 ) and a public
_
open house ( Nov 9 ) 0
0
L
• Opportunities and constraints N
• Goals =
_
• Ideas for regional , community, and neighborhood scale
implementation of goals M
• Priorities o
• Audience : Property owners , interested residents , City staffCn
_
L
a
.o
a
L
d
O
a
_
a�
E
M
tU
f�
Q
Packet Pg . 121
2 .4
O
L
CU
_
V
Cn
City of o
, Fort Collins
i
N
a
Cn
ma
r.
a
• Vision for the Mountain Vista Subarea : Provide a framework for
successful and innovative community design . CU
L
a
• One of the last remaining major growth areas in the City N
_
• Intended to have a new community center, enhanced multimodal
O
travel corridors , industrial lands , employment areas , a new
W
community park and open lands .
_
• Fresh concepts for incorporating urban agriculture and natural
0
Cn
spaces into future development to preserve rural character
a
.o
a
L
d
O
a
_
a
E
tU
f
Q
Packet Pg . 122
2 .4
0
L
CU
_
V
Cn
City of NOW o
, Fort CollinsNNW
" Living Corridor" i
Concept
L
a
0
Connections to ace green s throughout
g p g
subarea ; preservation of open lands o
Integration of public and private spaces
Encouraging cluster development
_
�' • , .�"~ --� I Incorporation of agriculture at several scales
00
E MI/V ' Achieve necessary density while maintaining
c _ • . • � rural character °
� � m
, a
'o
a
"` a
3
0
a
_
a
E
M
U
f
Q
Packet Pg . 123
2 .4
0
�L
V
0
z
• i i N ! M
W
N
urg. sue y
• ' • gr,,w lurry
I � �
I , �
u
1 c
7
�- 0
0
Cn
4 dd 33 3
� �� � �� �� • �.i' >,,. ` " ` .`.,. fin'` ,y i" _
i�� •�....�M•.ct � F�.� i } � I O
�narc � a
d
C
d
U
tE
Q
Packet Pg . 124
2 .4
O
L
CU
_
V
City of NOW
, Fort CollinsOz
"Agriburban " Development
a
Cn
MO
• Models for integrating agriculture and housing :
1 . Agricultural retention — preserve farmland ( regional scale )
L
2 . Urban agriculture — small - scale production , underutilized spaces N
3 . Agricultural urbanism — working farm associated with a
neighborhood /subdivision ( low resident involvement )
M
4 . Agrarian urbanism — working farm integrated into a M
neighborhood /subdivision ( high resident involvement )
O
_
• Typically organic/ low or no pesticides and herbicides Cn
L
a
• Mountain Vista could have elements of several of these models . a.
L
d
O
a
_
a
E
tU
f
Q
Packet Pg . 125
2 .4
O
L
CU
a
U
City of NOW
, Fort CollinsOz
"Agriburban " Development
a
Cn
Ma
• Agriburban development is similar to a typical golf course community,
but the clubhouse and golf course are replaced with a barn and farm . o
L
a
• Benefits of agriburban development
• Health — physical activity, access to recreation , open space
O
• IM
M
Environment — waste reduction , local food production
M
• Economy — reduction in lawn /turf maintenance costs and
0
pesticide/ herbicide costs ( if organic production )
Cn
• Social — gathering places , sense of place , cross - generational
activity
0
a
L
d
O
a
c
a
E
M
U
f
Q
Packet Pg . 126
CU
r.
Cn
r.
City of 0
Fort Collins
a.
cc »
Agriburban Development ,
t Uzi i +i • • •
1 TS� t ,
♦ ttt yyr ��.0 un� .
` It ♦ tt ysi ♦♦ ' , t .
neighborhood design 0
w ♦ o �
A F. ♦ ♦� ,. , t4Yyyy
► • 0 men ' •� `�rYY A
Neighborhood livability
Integration of agriculture
and natural systems
Sim
a.
inkVistai
♦ �. 1, v ♦ ♦♦♦ " , ti ♦♦♦� 4t4Y
�.. . . .
o
15 0
2 .4
0
•L
CU
r.
V
CO
City of o
Fort Collins
wwr i
Case Study : 1 I ( Gilbert , AZ )
L
a
0
Ma
• Broke ground in 2000
kllitlkl Ilk
}'ta - - 160 acres
Ilk
• 452 single -family homes L
• a
117 - unit assisted living center
i
kill L
• 16 acres certified organic
�' � '�- ' (�s farmland — vegetable , fruit , small 0
_k ,�. livestock
� _ Neighborhood square , 0
" "� , ''�X �,' "� a farmstand coffeehouse farm - to -
ah
' "� kk
Cn
' ' . , _ : - , ;� table restaurant
t„r_
.WALL�i -'��:y --���- _ -vu'�C1/uuar- _ � - •' •' ,ar•..#:1.r1 M
• CSA option for residents a.
0
• a
c
a�
E
M
tU
f�
Q
Packet Pg . 128
r.
Cn
r.
City of
CU Fort Collins
a.
Cluster Development
Cn
Grouping development on a
site to preserve more land for 0
open space , recreation , or
agricultural uses
Helps achieve multiple 0
ity goals
communi
Several scales , from subarea
clustering to subdivision
Cn
design a,
a.
r _
.c
•
17
Packet
. g
2 .4
0
�L
CU
a
V
City of Now
, Fort Collins
i
Example : . ( FortCollins ,
L
a
0
Broke ground in 2002
.. ..-r - . a
W , ^ I" °� 106 acres °
,uv .1 �„ ,
• 481 units
Q
r . ' s ' iZ a •mill Clustering shows a similar land
Al
Iwo
" '' : s use pattern to agriburban
JJ �� • .� ►1 • • • 11 • • I111 •
WWdevelopment
Could be applied to Mountain Vista
f
Green spaces = agriculture
Strong connections to open lands
.o
a
L
d
O
a
c
a�
E
tU
f�
+r
Q
Packet Pg . 130
r.
CIO
r.
City of
CU Fort Collins
Example : Greenwood Cottages ( WA ) ;
■CID
10 d / u per acre
v .;,Ply ^ _ , � �'. � ; , r'+• - - - -� _ --
Smaller units 768 to
998 square feet U)
ice` Y
Shared community
44*
Built under a specific M
J r■�y�f■ `M_ 00
7
„ " Cottage Housing •
�n . • pment
code
CID
- - • I condos
•
�,, ■
19 :
Packet . •
2 .4
O
�L
CU
_
U
Cn
City of NOW o
, Fort Collins
i
Open Lands in Mountain
L
a
_
• To incorporate Nature in the City into the Mountain Vista Subarea
Plan , this concept focuses on preserving and connecting open lands o
L
a
• Types of open lands :
_
• Agricultural production =
O
m
• Stormwater detention Go
M
• Parks
_
O
• Trails/ pedestrian network
_
• Redesigned # 8 Ditch a
.o
a
L
d
O
a
_
a�
E
U
f�
Q
Packet Pg . 132
2 .4
0
�L
CU
_
V
Cn
City of o
, Fort Collins
own i
Example : Community • I & Gardens
L
a
0
_
• Integrated with Enhanced Travel
School 4Employment/Cluster 0.Corridors and re tonal bike/bike/ pedestrian o
� Development �, g p
0 trail system
0
0 N
o •
- Focal point for PSD school site , cluster
development , residential o
Agriculture Community Park M
Innovation and Gardens neighborhood , and Commercial Center 11
Lab
• Park use and community gardens
Cn
Connects to other " fingers " of open
community
Residential
Neighborhood Commercial lands
a.
a�
3
0
a
_
a�
E
U
f�
Q
Packet Pg . 133
2 .4
0
L
_
W
V
City of o
Frt Collins
-mom" Example : Redesigned # 8 Ditch
a
N
A =
R 06i'S'N Q- •.A(ZR� a.> A �
NEl7WGNMEM AND SIDE SLOPES (Q
TE A MORE NATURAL CKAAAOER d
\ `
ENABLE >
-+ E - �V �NEL w�TH =
-
S' OSER TO ER NNE _ 3
DER TO NElh1R 0
,• ,�
00
hATE .5 EOq RAVRO` ED
• • ��v v } _ HABITAT
A _
0
t � l
M , P4*0
a
L
3
0
a
m
�a
Q
Packet Pg . 134
2 .4
O
L
CO
a
V
City of NOW
, Fort CollinsOz
i
Fill
Example : Kederike Property Concept W
a�
L
a
Ma
(:
ITActes . . • Integration of
on d
Natural Park sto rmwate r and :z
21 4Acres ar- Natural Party' Trail
Trail 9,4 Acres al- I 21 .4 Attu al- 0)
\`• iParking Son Race recreation / park use a
Trail TrailTreil
Connections
r N
eMN
= Proceeds from
MMN 89A 1 % . development o
Sunrg. ( LMN / MMN ) could
t1 .9Accres *I. �I MMN + Na�relArear °m finance infrastructure
17 8 Aaea H• �l Natural ater �„
Stamwatar ' Future Stortnwatx \�
28.45 Acres 16 Acres +1- I , 0
j development
cn
C^ Still a conceptual plan
Kederike Properly Concept B I Natural Park `• ' PM P" Will a,�„ M d
- - L
hl; 4. 201e Nor is sole y
O
a
c
a�
E
tU
ff3
4�
Q
Packet Pg . 135
2 .4
O
�L
CU
_
U
Cn
City of o
, Fort Collins
NNW i
AgricultureIncorporating W
L
a
Cn
Ma
_
• Agricultural production at multiple scales
_
0
• Sensitive to stormwater concernsCU
L
a
CU
U)
• Levels of resident involvement could vary ; from more traditional
subdivisions to more agriburban developments =
O
• Encourage innovative food production methods , including
aquaponics , greenhouses , and rooftop farms/gardens =
O
_
Cn
U.
a
.o
a
L
d
O
a
_
a�
E
M
U
M
Q
Packet Pg . 136
2 .4
O
�L
CU
r.
V
Cn
City of o
, Fort Collins
NNW i
AgricultureIncorporating
L
a
Cn
Scales of Agriculture -
Farm
Neighborhood
Farm
1 a.F a
Community
— Garden
7
Rooftop
rGarden
17�r M
1 _
r
Personal
GardenCn
d
a
L
d
O
a
c
a�
E
M
tU
M
Q
Packet Pg . 137
2 .4
O
�L
CU
a
U
City of NOW
, Fort CollinsOz
OWN M
i
Example : Greenhouses • W
L
a
Cn
Ma
• High -value crops ( fruits ,
vegetables , etc . ) can be grown in o
smaller, more intensive spaces
with minimal visual impact
- -- -- Very water efficient , especially 0 0
when combined with aquaponics 00
M
- - - -
( fish production )
• Potential for high energy
Cn
efficiency with careful design
.o
a
L
d
O
• a
c
a�
E
M
U
f�
Q
Packet Pg . 138
Example : Community Garden ;
' 1w.10
0 Ave
i
VO
41 Vol.
44
i
< `
. LL
a a / + t A •
1
IMP
` ,. • - ♦
1AFve
beell N
1 _ oil• 1jl \ ' ..�.
27 :
2 .4
O
L
CU
a
U
Cn
City of NOW o
, Fort Collins RuralDensity &
i
Character
N
O
L
a
Cn
ma
• There are several opportunities to maintain the rural " feel " of the
Mountain Vista area as density increases , o
d
L
a
• Elements of rural character N
• Roads — use county cross - sections approved in LCUASS for o
streets in the Mountain Vista subarea IM
Go
• Network of pedestrian paths in lieu of sidewalks on a grid
O
• Regional trail network
Cn
• Cluster development
L
a
• Lighting — more at key intersections , less elsewhere
a.
d
O
a
c
a
E
U
f
Q
Packet Pg . 140
2 .4
0
�L
)4
a
U
City of NOW
, Fort Collins Rurallow Density
i
Character
N
O
L
a
0
51' ROW (MIND �
4.5 4.9 J
WALK WALK
5 5 (MIN) 30 ROADWAY (MM
UTIL. 46' ROW UTIL. IT 6'
ESMT. I I ESMT. I aKvrr Ravr O
IMN.) IMN.I
6'.5 Min. Fence Setback (3
9' 28' 9' g i
Roadway I U-n
ESMT. 15 g UTIL. N
— Fence TRAVEL ESMT. ;
BARK PARK �
7 I fa
C
7
Rural Local Road Residential Local Street
Go
- No sidewalk - 4 . 5 ft sidewalk M
- Internal to developments - All residential local streets
- Minimum lot size 1 acre - No minimum lot size
- 300 vehicles per day - 1 , 000 vehicles per day
.o
a
L
d
• 0
a
c
a�
E
U
f'3
Q
Packet Pg . 141
Example : Skyway Drive
Iola ' /
�r
f_
30 :
3
Example : North Shields Street ;
'! 'o's is
■
31 :
2 .4
0
L
CU
a
V
City of NOW
, Fort CollinsNNW
Next Steps
i
N
a
0
Ma
• Possible next steps .
• Analysis — more thorough review of existing LUC standards o
• Integration of Capital Improvements related to stormwater
• Revisit street standard designs to promote rural character
• Design Guidelines based on best practices for innovative housing , o
urban agriculture and habitat preservation
M
• Partnerships ( public agencies , private developers , CSR' s )
0
• Drawbacks .
Cn
• This kind of development is challenging to implement
• Requires committed , creative developers a.
0
a
c
a
E
M
tU
f
Q
Packet Pg . 144
2 .4
O
�L
CU
_
U
Cn
City of o
, Fort Collins
i
Question • Council
L
a
ma
_
�a
J
_
d
Q
0
What is the best way to implement the Mountain Vista Open Lands
L
a
Preservation vision ? N
_
_
O
M
00
44*
_
O
cv
_
d
Cn
d
U.
a
.o
a
L
d
O
a
_
a�
E
U
f�
Q
Packet Pg . 145
DATE : April 26 , 2016
STAFF : Kurt Friesen , Director of Park Planning & Development WORK SESSION ITEM
Mike Calhoon , Parks Supervisor City Council
SUBJECT FOR DISCUSSION
Refreshing Fort Collins Parks .
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
The purpose of this item is to inform Council about refreshing Fort Collins parks . Fort Collins parks are aging and
in need of improvements in order for them to adequately meet the growing demands of today' s users . Currently,
there are two programs in place for construction and infrastructure replacement in parks , the park build -out and
park life cycle programs . These programs provide funding for construction of new parks in the city and
replacement or restoration of existing park components . Both of these programs have inadequate funding .
Currently there is not a program in place for adapting parks to meet the changing needs of park users . There are
numerous reasons to refresh parks . These include keeping pace with changing trends in recreation , adapting to
changing community needs , providing equitable park experiences city wide , connecting people with nature , and
replacing and improving antiquated infrastructure.
A proposed process for refreshing parks has been identified , and is currently being implemented at City Park . The
steps for this process include project goal identification , preparation of initial concepts , gathering community input,
master plan development, phase I project identification , and phased construction based on available funding . The
focus of the park refresh program should be on community parks , as these typically are more programmed than
neighborhood parks . It is estimated that approximately 50 million dollars are needed to refresh 4 aging community
parks . There are numerous benefits to parks , including economic benefits as illustrated by studies completed by
the National Recreation and Parks Association and Trust for Public Land .
GENERAL DIRECTION SOUGHT AND SPECIFIC QUESTIONS TO BE ANSWERED
City staff is seeking direction on whether Council agrees with the park refresh concept and would like City staff to
further investigate funding mechanisms for refreshing parks . In support of this concept, Council needs to be
aware of funding deficiencies in the park build out and park life cycle programs . Specific questions to be
answered include :
1 . What feedback does Council have regarding the park refresh concept?
2 . What direction does Council have regarding funding options for refreshing parks?
3 . What feedback does Council have regarding park build out and life cycle programs?
BACKGROUND / DISCUSSION
Fort Collins parks provide an invaluable role in citizen ' s lives . They provide sports venues , engaging play
environments for children to learn and explore , open spaces to enjoy a picnic , read a book or throw a frisbee , and
quiet places for relaxation and rejuvenation . With over 48 parks totaling 957 acres , Fort Collins provides quality
parks dispersed throughout the city, most conveniently located within walking distance from homes . Parks
consistently rate very high on citizen surveys . Since 2008 , over 90% of citizens have rated the quality of Fort
Collins parks as "good" or "very good" . Parks are well used by citizens throughout the city. Some of the most
significant community events take place in parks , including the Independence Day celebration in City Park , the
annual kite festival in Spring Canyon Park , Tour de Fat in Washington Park , and multiple concerts and fairs in
Civic Center Park . In 2015 , over 4 , 800 sporting events occurred in Fort Collins parks , with over 170 , 000 attending
Packet Pg . 146
April 26 , 2016 Page 2
these events . Parks are integral to the health and well -being of citizens , and provide an important role in reducing
obesity and maintaining a healthy lifestyle . The most beloved activity in parks is walking , as many Fort Collins'
residents begin or end each day with a walk around one of Fort Collins parks .
Currently, there are two programs in place for construction and for infrastructure replacement in parks , Park Build
Out and Park Life Cycle . A brief summary of these programs follows :
Park Build Out
The Parks and Recreation Policy Plan , most recently updated in 2008 , provides a blueprint for new park
construction in the City. Not including Southeast Community Park , which is anticipated to be constructed soon ,
there are 2 community parks and 13 neighborhood parks remaining to be constructed in the city. The majority of
these parks will be located in the northeast portion of the City, as development occurs in this area . City staff
coordinates with developers to identify and purchase park properties based on the plan . Design and development
of the park typically begins after approximately 75% of homes around the park have been constructed . Impact
fees paid at the time of building permit issue provide funding for new parks . Current parks being developed
include Southeast Community Park , located at the intersection of Ziegler and Kechter, and Maple Hill Park ,
located near the intersection of Country Club Road and Turnberry.
New park costs have increased dramatically over the last few years . New park components include raw water,
land , consultant fees , development fees , miscellaneous costs , and construction . A ten year projection of
Community Park and Neighborhood Park impact fees fall short of what is needed to fund new park construction .
In order to keep pace with rising costs , City staff recommends an increase to the impact fees . An evaluation of
park impact fees is currently underway, with a recommendation to Council anticipated later this year.
Park Life Cycle
The park life cycle program repairs and renovates park assets throughout the existing park system . Initiated in
1993 , this program supports repair and renovation of over 1 , 000 varied park assets within many different
component categories including : hardscapes , buildings , fields , trails , courts , structures , playgrounds , irrigation ,
and water related park components . The program prioritizes repairs based on health and safety concerns and
regulatory related mandates (such as the Americans with Disabilities Act) . The program also looks for
opportunities to replace outdated resource intensive infrastructure with more sustainable infrastructure that meets
current codes and best management practices . Typically, the Life Cycle Program completes 30-40 projects per
year including items like playground renovations , court asphalt repairs , minor irrigation repairs , walkway and
bridge repairs , lighting upgrades , park roadway and parking lot repairs , painting buildings , etc . This program is
essential to repairing the infrastructure of existing park facilities as well as enhancing the infrastructure to support
growing demand in the parks . The life cycle program also is imperative to preserving equity within the City to
ensure that every household , regardless of the age of the neighborhood , has access to high quality parks .
In 2002 , the Parks Life Cycle program was funded at $463 , 160 for 703 acres of park land which equates to $660
per acre . During the recession the funding was cut back to $275 , 533 . In 2016 , the Parks Life Cycle program was
funded at $526 , 152 for 957 acres which equates to $550 per acre . Life cycle funding has not kept pace with park
land expansion or increasing costs .
Based on the current park asset inventory and current component repair and renovation costs , the Parks Life
Cycle fund needs a minimum of $2 , 500 per acre to address major park life cycle needs (hardscapes , restrooms ,
playgrounds , irrigation systems , bridges and some structures ) . A BFO offer will be proposed in the 2017- 18
budget cycle to address the Park Life Cycle shortfall .
Park Refresh
Park Refresh is a new concept for Fort Collins . Over time , park user needs change , and it is not always
appropriate to replace the same aged park element with a new one , as provided through the Life Cycle program .
Instead , it makes sense to update parks for several reasons :
Packet Pg . 147
April 26 , 2016 Page 3
1 . Keep pace with changing trends in recreation
New trends in recreation are continually emerging . For example , today pickleball is a sport that has rapidly grown
in popularity nationwide and in Northern Colorado . Pickleball players have expressed a desire for dedicated ,
lighted pickleball courts in Fort Collins . There is a need for parks to accommodate this emerging use . There are
many other similar recreational activities in demand .
2. Adapt to changing community needs
As evidenced by the many ways City Park has been used over its 100+ year history, parks must be versatile and
adapt to changing needs of the community. A desire for healthy living , locally grown food , and greater
connections with nature are in demand among Fort Collins residents . Today there is a high level of citizen interest
in community gardens and nature play environments . Fort Collins parks should adapt to these and other changing
needs .
3. Provide equitable park experiences city wide
Newer parks in the southern parts of the City including Fossil Creek Park and Spring Canyon Park provide
amenities such as skate parks , dog parks , newer playgrounds , and quality restrooms and shelters . Older parks
including Lee Martinez and City Park in the northern part of the city do not provide the same level of service as
these newer parks . A park refresh would raise the level of service in older parks to match the newer parks .
4. Connect people with nature
Fort Collins parks provide an excellent venue to connect residents with nature . Naturalistic plantings within parks
create environments that provide a nature retreat for residents , demonstrate the value of native or xeric plants ,
provide wildlife habitat, and contrast beautifully with turf areas . Many Fort Collins parks are Audubon Certified ,
and provide valuable sanctuary for birds . Many parks in the city lack this natural character, and would benefit from
a park refresh to enhance and improve residents' connections with nature .
5. Replace and improve antiquated infrastructure
Fort Collins parks are aging . The average age of parks within Fort Collins is 27 years . Infrastructure including
parking lots , drives , irrigation systems and lighting have exceeded their life cycle and are in need of replacement.
Many parks were constructed before the Americans with Disabilities Act was in effect, and require upgrades to
bring them to current standards . A park refresh would enable parks to be improved to meet current needs and
replace aging infrastructure .
A six step process for refreshing parks is proposed :
1 . Identify project goals
2 . Prepare initial concepts
3 . Gather community Input
4 . Develop a park master plan
5 . Identify a phase I project
6 . Phased construction based on available funding
This process is currently underway for City Park . There is some available funding for improvements to City Park
through the Building on Basics capital tax . Funding has been identified for replacement of the City park train ,
improvements to Club Tico , and minimal improvements to the park . Project goals and initial concepts for the park
were developed , and two community meetings for the project were conducted in early March . All project materials
are available on the project web site for community review and comment. After the comment period closes , a
master plan for the core area of the park will be developed , a phase I project identified based on available
funding , and construction of a phase I project will begin . Subsequent phases will be constructed as funding
becomes available . This is the process proposed for future park refresh efforts .
Packet Pg . 148
April 26 , 2016 Page 4
Although both neighborhood and community parks are in need of refreshing , the primary focus should be on
community parks , as they are typically more program intensive than neighborhood parks . Estimates for refreshing
parks are very conceptual at this point, as no planning has been conducted . Assuming approximately '/2 of the
acreage of a park is improved , the cost for improvements to the four oldest community parks (City Park , Rolland
Moore , Lee Martinez, and Edora ) , may cost approximately 50 million (2016 dollars ) .
Parks are a Good Investment
Numerous studies illustrate the many benefits of parks . Both the National Recreation and Parks Association and
the Trust for Public Land have prepared studies on the economic benefits of parks . In the 2015 study, The
Economic Impacts of Local Parks: An Examination of the Operations and Capital Spending on the United States
Economy, the NRPA reports nearly 140 billion in economic activity and the creation of 1 million jobs in 2013 . In
Measuring the Economic Value of a City Park System , The Trust for Public Land cites seven ways parks bring
value to a city. These include increased property values , increased tourism spending , direct use value , health
benefits , community cohesion , and improved air & water quality.
Options for funding refreshing parks may include the development of a park improvement fee , funding through
typical BFO cycles , or funding through the 10 year capital improvements tax.
ATTACHMENTS
1 . Community Parks Map ( PDF )
2 . Powerpoint presentation ( PDF )
Packet Pg . 149
�- �. -, , „��• .,. ..sue � _:,.-- ,� - ,� .�
ATTACHMENT
c
� .•erg
w
_ ■ � C.
y
c-
s.R fO h
�cWill
Ito
Vine Dr.Pro
re
1 ; �• t of I�Ir
1 ' �lE o _ •i " � �'J
1 _�,Si } • .1 _.il { p, .Yid' ♦ 1 I
Mulberry St. d'hF. Yy
��@ ...'a. Y '�
th
!tom if mG -- �-
•. + - 4 Prospect Rd.
a
c
R
a dill
J
O ■ r r}r
■ , Drake Rd.
�,Nj
E
di Horsetooth Rd.
a
�F.: ��• , •„ � 'rR���yM1'+� ��l 67§ �F � � � • �
IN
Y6 Harmony Rd.
_ - fY -d" ge
1 M,. 2 a�14. `�'1���� 'r�7ke , s • -dayY .-^��..yl tiE ^ hit
OutheastiCOMMUHILy rd1K
CO
oil
w �'J$ • i `` I� • ; ti . c�~ Trilby Rd _ n ► a _
lit
�► r �� y It r�, ,� �_�
ti C' t 1 `a a'TT��ri(3)y^ate•}J» 1,<_ — cs 1, °v4
\. I 1.` � r?i 6 • .•..,' I � _�� Vim.. � - 1 ..� ,«` i
Carpenter Rtl. 3 'gNyr- i xt
• Existing Community Parks
OProposed Community Parks
Existing Neighborhood Parks
Mv
m
Existing and Proposed Parks
m April , 2016 W
City of
Fnrtf nllinc
r Attachment: Community Parks Map (4347 : Refreshing Fort Collins Parks)
Fcity of 6-26- 16
ort Collins
. ,►: _ �. : s-K, . .. - yid - . '� ` � �'•
JJ
a.
75
LL
t • r,
r ATTACHMENT 2
Cn
Cu
Packet Pg . 151
1 �
1 i .
Refreshing Fort Collins Parks
Kurt Friesen , Park Planning & Development Director
3 . 2
Fort of
Questions for Council a.
_
O
U
0
LL
_
• What feedback does Council have regarding the park refresh y
concept ?
• What direction does Council have regarding funding options for
refreshing parks ? _
0
• What feedback does Council have regarding park build out and life
cycle programs ?
_.o
L
0
a
a
E
Ca
a
Packet Pg . 152
_ 1 •
i
LL
1
i . !t y �'ym7 'y ji y .�• • A y�;+� i r• _ ' - _- - - - �..� �.. y. -_ 1M: a► •
f • _ � .' a .��• * r . l � ��� � �� �' r � '� r . . ' � • i Ada . � •`^; ` _' � : \ (! ,•
Ai
A` «r �;k7j�r l :• _ .� r ` 1' r. . , , ' ' - a. � k ; .'r , t � ! �, 'JaI.F . .y , t �� -/ - '
ray- .i
�. •
IZ-
Packet Pg . 153
c
•
' r
a.
l _ i - �►'
Cn
Co
Lo
lk
CL
Ca
Packet
��` I ,� - - �� � * ^ i �ll,j� { • I ICI � ~+� . . � �� � I I^ • � ^ � � Rti •
•
• " �' / ,f
v
J y • •
i f i
.+
v±
. g
3 .2
-..• ,
M It I
Ilk
Y
4,00
ff
Idill
A0 , 1 '� P LL
1 lYr . ; I
I' _ • L•
� v +
tow
Io
! tlR�„e► di s t. gm
�
, III
for
r ' » N
too P tit00
L
y1wOm
- J .
v, ► i> 1 IG A `
Y y
f C. • .O
ffit Q.
it
r ` the If
If,
vp71
, v a .,Y r '1. r 1 r' ` • 1.' `��j �� �y` . �
Packet Pg . 155
3 . 2
I'pw7 - - 701
�w .t • a ' - ! Ma ' { .__
wF7 c yn 1N i iNu 0
a
,0 1 , , A F A �hw ��
a.
_ F "
LL
kil
to 1IN
` � \ \ `
aIs I !' AF4 . .
ti 1 � i'i �w►r►+v �'
FF
I
I x
E
Ca
IkI
Packet Pg . 156
i
1
1 Nllw.�M-.
•
7 •
•
ti«
} r
1 a
a.
s -
y _bwddow
' ' r
LL
Cn
op
log
Ca
Atom
OEM
A + i
y _
■►
yt ►
`+ }
�� �► /
Packet • 158
f
ax
r ` 44444
IV 7
CL
um
gyp. '+'.Y••^ l
Packet)MOO lytop,
Cu
. •
3 . 2
Fort of
Fort Collins Parks are Valued a.
� Y
N
_
O
U
0
LL
0)
_
t
N
0
L
2015 Citizen Survey Results o 0 =
4 0 0
_
L
Q
_.O
Q
L
0
a
" Good " or " Very Good "
ca
� a
Packet Pg . 160
City of
Fort Collins
Three Part Approacha.
75
1 Park Build Out Completing the Park System U.
2 . Park Life Cycle Program Maintaining What We Have
ark Refresh — Adapting to Changing Needs '
.
Cn
CL
CL
f � , I�( �I / ' � �,�r �� l.•P � ' � �� III �^��o-�1 iL_
— - ell
CIO
Packet
6 11
' •
3 . 2
Fort of
Existing Process a.
N
_
O
U
O
LL
_
t
N
O
L
M
_
NEW PARK BUILD PARK MAINTENANCE
O
a�
a�
_
d
N
Elm
Q
++
_.O
Q
L
O
a
a�
E
Cu
a
Packet Pg . 162
3 . 2
Fort ofNNW
� Y
Proposed Process a
N
_
O
U
O
LL
_
t
NEW
O
L
M
PARK • O
IL
BUILDcv
_
d
d
L
Q
_.O
Q
L
O
a
a�
E
ca
a
Packet Pg . 163
3 . 2
Fort of
N
Y
Park Build Out a
N
C
O
2 Community Parks
uad `O
• East Community Park -��. Richards �
"Its Z
• Northeast Community Park '
N
Hill
13 Neighborhood Parks A � �-
No heast M
• Maple Hill Iron Horse Comlaalt„
�ru.R.... x.eui � YiP01
• Trailhead Lind P�
• Bucking Horse Fossil Lake ! tape _ saR BRUSH
'
y Iron
d$ I Canal I
L
Morse �
• Eastridge • Lake Canal E .Z Trailhead a
AITAM PARK
• Interstate • Airport o Airport \ Eastridge O
PARK —
• Richards Lake 0 Huidekooper U TP qw„ 0
q " EMETERY
• Bacon Elementary - Eg
E
Based on 2008 Parks & Recreation Policy Plan 14
ca
Packet Pg , 164
3 . 2
Fort of - ' - • - y
Southeast Community Park d
N
C
-� O
LL
J
`�. ._ m
3 .y
ff
ti
o
to
Ca
a
Packet Pg . 165
• Current Park Projects
Southeast Community Park
y VOOW
r
VOW-
a._
` 1 P y� hqt q.� � •
rV'o 4 i
- - - - - - •.
16
. • 166
3 . 2
f IN
on
Fort Collins - ' - 01
- y
/ \ L
Southeast Community Park d
N
C
O
U
0
o
LL
N
r�
L
IIIIIIII o
O
- - a
a�
E
Ca
a
Packet Pg . 167
Cit
• Current Park Projects
Southeast Community Park • '
.
LL
Cu
Packet
18 -
. • 168
Cit
• Current Park Projects
Southeast Community Parka.
I .
LL
.
Ilk
� 1
IN
l{ }
t
i I + IIII � � li
oil CL
Cu
Packet
•d
19
. g
3 . 2
f on
Fort Collins Current Park 01
- y
/ \ L
Southeast Community Park d
N
_
O
U
_ oAM
LL
L
r` I
l
_
O
M
_
d
i L
Q
_.O
Q
U.
W
3
O
a
a�
E
Ca
� a
Packet Pg . 170
3 . 2
Fort of
Current Park Pr ects a.
01
Y
N
C
O
Maple Hill Neighborhood Park
O
park concept A park concept B park concept C
ZOO
fil
twn
® O
l d
` ...� \�/ V-� Im.+.nh nwVV M.)) )Oi5 ® OYw�Y�•YO0�7l�IS® �
E
V
CU
�I
�1
a
Packet Pg . 171
3 . 2
Fort of
� Y
Neighborhood Park 10 Year Projection a
N
C
O
U
$ 3 , 5007000 0
U.
CD
$ 3 , 000 , 000
N
$ 2 , 500 , 000
$ 2 , 000 , 000
$ 1 , 500 , 000
0
$ 110001000
$ 5001000
■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■
L
2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025 2026 3:
0
a
mAdministration Park Projects — Impact Fee Collections
E
Cu
a
Packet Pg . 172
3 . 2
Fort ofown
Community Park 10 Year Projection a.
� Y
N
C
O
U
$ 910001000 0
0
U.
$ 810001000 C '
t
$ 710001000
$ 610001000
$ 5 , 000 , 000
M
$ 410001000
0
$ 310001000
$ 210001000
L
$ 110001000
$ 0 $
L
2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025 2026 3:
0
a
Park Projects — Impact Fee Collections
E
CU
a
Packet Pg . 173
3 . 2
Fort of
N
Y
Park Build Out a
N
C
O
U
Suggested Solution : U.
• Increase park impact fees . Fee increase evaluation is currently y
underway.
M
M
Cn
O
Or
t y
� y
E
CU
a
Packet Pg . 174
3 . 2
Fort ofNNW
Parks Life Cycle Program a.
75
Y
N
C
Playground before
Replacement or Restoration
o
of Existing Park Elements ._
N
L
Recent Projects
t
• Greenbriar Playground
• Edora Ballfield Lights
• English Ranch Walkway repairs Playground after
• Golden Meadows Tennis Court
• Spring Canyon Bike Park T.
1.
Renovation Phase 1 _ . ;
� 1 � _
a
CU
a
Packet Pg . 175
3 . 2
Fort ofNNW
Parks Life Cycle Program
Y
N
C
O
U
1 , 000 + Acres Life Cycle Components U.
• 6 Community Parks
N
• 42 Neighborhood & Asphalt/ Playgrounds w
Concrete yg
Pocket Parks
• Archery Range Buildings Fields Irrigation
L
Courts Structures
c
�o
L
0
Water a
c
a�
E
ca
• a
Packet Pg . 176
3 . 2
Fort ofNNW
Average Park Age
Y
N
C
O
U
30
O
29 LL
28 Z
L
W
N
27
d
26
M�
W 25 M
}
24
O
23
C
22 d
N
d
L
21 Q
20
COMMUNITY PARK NEIGHBORHOOD PARK POCKET PARK Q
L
O
Note : The three oldest parks in the city, Washington Park , Library Park and City Park are
over 100 years old and not included in the average . E
a
Packet Pg . 177
3 . 2
Fort oflow
Parks Life Cycle Funding a.
Y
N
C
O
U
$ 17000 , 000 1000 0
U.
$ 8007000 800
L
$ 6001000 600
L M
U �
Q �
$ 4001000 400
$ 2001000 200
'o
L
$ 0
N CO �t UM) CO f� CO m O N M 7T UM) (D r� O
O O O O O O O O d
O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O
N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N �+
C
Total Acres Actual Life Cycle Funding E
CU
a
Packet Pg . 178
3 . 2
Fort ofWOMW
N
Y
Life Cycle — 10 Year Projection L
a
N
C
O
$ 4, 500, 000
0
$ 4, 000, 000 U.
$ 3 , 500, 000
N
$ 3 , 000, 000
$ 2 , 500, 000
M
$ 2 , 000, 000
$ 1 , 500, 000
$ 1 , 000, 000
L
$ 500, 000
$ _ o
L
2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025 2026 0
a
■ Community Park needs Neighborhood / Pocket Parks — KFCG Contribution
Includes only current park acreage - no proposed parks included
CU
• a
Packet Pg . 179
City of
Fort Collins
Park Life Cyclea.
Suggested Solution : 0
LL
• Offer - Cycle
Funding :E
� �•� .
Cn
CL
CU
Packet Pg .
.N� . tl � `, y •' \ �1:,-. 'f / !�j"t'}�. . . , y,,, _r � _�'. - e i yfk�� i ' ,�yti4, ,y \ ` , RS i.. �
• M• y M ? e ,
ai►
30
180
City of
Fort Collins
Park Refresh ■Reasons to Update Parks
75
•
- - . - - -
Adapt to . NeedsProvide Equitable Park Experiences City Wide
Connect People With
• •
Replace and Improve Antiquated Infrastructure
K � • w � vsQy ' A. "'iL � t . Sy r � _ I
CU
Packet
- � ' � • 1 � •� L� , - - YY �'t L ''� �= jai, _ � ��. j � �``�� d" '
• � 9i r ;
31 -
' •
City of
Fort Collins
Reasons to Update Parks �
75
- . Pace with Changing TrendsRecreation
•
LL
•N G e,
CO
i �A�` O��e01�♦701e� �� r ♦•��•?'♦'iii00'O?�t0� ' v?'�Y♦ ?7 ' Z": ? S� a* ' .,.'r,",. t9�♦
�' i � •r a♦♦l9, a•a♦e0. � , aea�.:e♦•e♦•�°e♦♦♦°i°� ram°••° • 7i h . ,' " � ' •♦�°i°e♦°•°•♦O
� �99,4t�0,�9g9 r z - �`P.D rPr.ASb!'dO�AO�t°nO�GyA�O�•�♦�i�•±♦�♦oe�♦�♦4; 6♦•�e��esi °♦• �•� F d♦°�Pi°�•°•°•b�
♦ e♦ p ♦•• •♦♦•
� ♦ OR A��6 „ (. i3 L�A„9Gt4F4�,J $0 y�9es�i> PSei•�4A4°A i O-0�O�9�a♦iIGdAO°♦° O°ea°A°6°A�1 .�� :jai •♦♦♦♦••e♦e••♦� •
-�• . lid • y -h ife P;. {. q ci.+.-
':��®R®�w� a� ��a�■tea/ �a/■�aaaa�d��o � � _ , � � _ ^�.. un _ h � ,
—�■/■/a �. ,Ala.a`arl■.aiaal+z®r��=c��c�._ ;. . ,
��a� w/a�■�a w�a/a/a��
www/w/wa -
/a/w/w/a a/ ��ilw arl /w�a�a/� ■ t _ _ _
wow a�a/ =a�■/a�a� n � ;� -
i■/a/f/■
I■/a///■Ir•a/Y- �1 /Marl �rl.rro��lr�a///
■/a/a/a r/a �■ a� a��a�a/a�■r a �/■/a�a ��: ;�i/iiiiiwiiii� . •
/■�a� �■� a� tea/■ ■/ ■/awr . 0 �a/a�a�
ru
Packet
■w4: a/ a/■ �■ ■.a/■/■ ■/■e ■ '/■/ ' i ®wa/aawa■awa�ae ,
�� � a/ i�a . r/ .ra�a�■ ■ a .ate �sl�w���w//■►��..�
■r,, �na�� a �' .r � ��a/aa br' IlvJ c:.i lY Y'-.J �Ja ... �.�.v-..." .-��.
a/t/<I I/Is � •s• ��i���_r•r•��ri� �rr�i�•�•i�s�r�s��s��••i�`��_
.= s
Pickle � ll
• •
City of
Fort Collins
Reasons to Update Parks ■75
ChangingAdapt to - - .
-
LL
.. •. J{e} - - X •xi . . ice +� , .+.�- . � � r
Wit, . f-: j
~. •
Community Gardens
CU
33 -
Packet
' •
City of
Fort Collins
Reasons to Update Parks � �
75
Provide Equitable Park Experiences City Wide r.
LL
INN
01
I ,
x
I _
t - - -
4 " •
Fossil Creek Park Playground Lee Martinez Park Playground E
CU
Packet
34
. g
3 . 2
Fort ofIMF
� Y
Reasons to Update Parks a
N
C
O
Connect People with Nature o
LL
Z
- t/1
MINE
LW
it
� — L
= - %.7- %Jmmter . T . . . . - i .r 'i
in
Y' W lipF IL
q• _
� . • F . O
d
la
a�
a�
a
Packet Pg . 185
City of
Fort Collins
Reasons to Update Parks ■ �
75
Replace and Improve Antiquated infrastructure 0
LL
1 z •
CL
CL
Accessibility
Irrigation Pavements
CU
36
Packet
. • 186
City of
Fort Collins
Park Refresh Processa.
LL
01
INITIAL PARK PHASED
CONCEPTS MASTER PLAN CONSTRUCTION
PHASEI -
PROJECT COMMUNITY PROJECT
Cu
Packet
GOALS INPUT IDENTIFICATION
37 -
' •
3 . 2
Fort oflow
_ Refresh
N
ark
Y
Example d
N
C
O
March 3 & 7 Community Meetings o
.WAWA81 % M
.�
CITY PARK
TOMORROW i L
City Of
� Fort Collins
c
E
CU
a
Packet Pg . 188
Park Refresh Example ■ �
�J 'f ►- "' �, �``'�a°�, III _
4ID_ . Tie¢_ :.�'— - •�._ j t�� :O % � <',� CITY PARK
r' ' ; �-.f " ' ,�r•���;� �„�•`y. roMoaaow
.0 - i a►C i- Parrot
ZAP MY w-
It
/ ��-' i■ \01Q\O�. //A �
/�i �/� �►���- / .�..� "'fir I- TAM�
/ �� � � � / w . r �'� yam__ - _"�� +- U/ f'/� /� � .. � / _'� i • �+^
LJ= Y
♦ Y� ♦ V
1 ,41
1
I
• F a� •
�■
".ram -� •
39
3 . 2
Fort ofBMW
N
Y
I Refresh Estimate by I
N
C
O
U
$ 18 , 000 , 000
O
LL
$ 16 , 000 , 000
Z
$ 14 , 000 , 000
a�
L
$ 12 , 000 , 000
ti
$ 10 , 000 , 000 oil
M
$850005000
O
$65000 , 000
c
m
$450007000
L
Q
$25000 , 000 =
o
Q
$0
City Park Rolland Moore Park Lee Martinez Park Edora Community Park o
a
Approximately 50 Million Dollars Total
E
CU
� a
Packet Pg . 190
3 . 2
Fort of
Park Refresh Funding Options a.
� Y
N
C
O
U
• Development of a Park Improvement Fee
U.
Funding through Typical BFO Cycles
N
• 10 year Capital Improvements Tax
M
O
Z r r/
400/4 tooh /V
Cn
�l o r sib jQ
• 41
4 f� ,�
�` ' � jl� t►Is�tl r a
1 • • • t
CU
- a
Packet Pg . 191
3 . 2
Fort oflow
Parks are a Good Investment/ \ L
d
N
C
O
T U T 0
U.
x X National Recreation for P u B L I
and Park Association LAN D
L
CONSERVING LhL% d FOR r' rt-� l' I i �
ti
140 billion in economic Increase in property value
activity that resulted in nearly Increase in tourism spending o
1 million US jobs in 2013 . Direct use value
• Health benefits
L
• Community cohesion
• Improved air & water quality
0
a
1 - 2015 The Economic Impacts of Local Parks : An Examination of the Operations and Capital Spending on the United States Economy
a>
2 - 2003 Measuring the Economic Value of a City Park System — Trust for Public Land E
ca
- a
Packet Pg . 192
3 . 2
Fort of
Questions for Council a.
_
O
U
0
LL
• What feedback does Council have regarding the park refresh
N
concept ?
• What direction does Council have regarding funding options for M
refreshing parks ? "
_
0
• What feedback does Council have regarding park build out and life
cycle programs ? L
_.o
L
0
a
a
E
Ca
- a
Packet Pg . 193
City of •
F6rt Collins AGENDA
Wade Troxell , Mayor City Council Chambers
Gerry Horak , District 6 , Mayor Pro Tem City Hall West
Bob Overbeck , District 1 300 LaPorte Avenue
Ray Martinez , District 2 Fort Collins , Colorado
Gino Campana , District 3
Kristin Stephens , District 4 Cablecast on City Cable Channel 14
Ross Cunniff, District 5 and Channel 881 on the Comcast cable system
Carrie Daggett Darin Atteberry Wanda Winkelmann
City Attorney City Manager City Clerk
The City of Fort Collins will make reasonable accommodations for access to City services , programs, and activities
and will make special communication arrangements for persons with disabilities. Please call 221 -6515 (V/TDD : Dial
711 for Relay Colorado) for assistance .
Special Meeting
April 26 , 2016
6 : 00 p . m .
• PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
• CALL TO ORDER
• ROLL CALL
• CITIZEN PARTICIPATION
City of Fort Collins Page 1
Individuals may comment regarding items scheduled on the Consent Calendar and items not
specifically scheduled on the agenda . Comments regarding land use projects for which a development
application has been filed should be submitted in the development review process** and not to the
Council .
• Those who wish to speak are asked to sign in at the table in the lobby (for recordkeeping
purposes ) .
• All speakers will be asked by the presiding officer to identify themselves by raising their hand ,
and then will be asked to move to one of the two lines of speakers (or to a seat nearby, for
those who are not able to stand while waiting ) .
• The presiding officer will determine and announce the length of time allowed for each speaker.
• Each speaker will be asked to state his or her name and general address for the record , and to
keep comments brief. Any written comments or materials intended for the Council should be
provided to the City Clerk .
• A timer will beep once and the timer light will turn yellow to indicate that 30 seconds of
speaking time remain , and will beep again and turn red when a speaker' s time to speak has
ended .
[**For questions about the development review process or the status of any particular development,
citizens should consult the Development Review Center page on the City website at
fcgov. com/developmentreview, or contact the Development Review Center at 221 -6750 .]
• CITIZEN PARTICIPATION FOLLOW-UP
Discussion Items
The method of debate for discussion items is as follows :
• Mayor introduces the item number, and subject; asks if formal presentation will be
made by staff
• Staff presentation (optional )
• Mayor requests citizen comment on the item (three minute limit for each citizen )
• Council questions of staff on the item
• Council motion on the item
• Council discussion
• Final Council comments
• Council vote on the item
Note : Time limits for individual agenda items may be revised , at the discretion of the Mayor, to ensure
all citizens have an opportunity to speak. Please sign in at the table in the back of the room .
The timer will buzz when there are 30 seconds left and the light will turn yellow. It will buzz again
at the end of the speaker's time .
1 . Resolution 2016-038 Making Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law Regarding the Appeal of the
March 7 , 2016 , Building Review Board Decision on Remand Regarding the Coy-Hoffman Silos , 1041
Woodward Way.
The purpose of this item is to make Findings of Fact and Conclusions of law regarding the appeal of
the Building Review Board ( BRB ) March 7 , 2016 , decision upon remand to uphold the Chief Building
Official ' s declaration that the two historic farm silos located at 1041 Woodward Way are "dangerous
structures" and not structures that pose an " imminent danger" (also referred to as " imminent threat" ) .
The appeal was heard by City Council on April 19 , 2016 ,
City of Fort Collins Page 2
• OTHER BUSINESS
A. Possible consideration of the initiation of new ordinances and/or resolutions by Councilmembers .
(Three or more individual Councilmembers may direct the City Manager and City Attorney to initiate
and move forward with development and preparation of resolutions and ordinances not originating
from the Council's Policy Agenda or initiated by staff. )
• ADJOURNMENT
City of Fort Collins Page 3
Agenda Item 1
AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY April 26 , 2016
City Council
STAFF
Mike Gebo , Chief Building Official
Laurie Kadrich , Director of PDT
SUBJECT
Resolution 2016-038 Making Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law Regarding the Appeal of the March 7 ,
2016 , Building Review Board Decision on Remand Regarding the Coy- Hoffman Silos , 1041 Woodward Way.
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
The purpose of this item is to make Findings of Fact and Conclusions of law regarding the appeal of the
Building Review Board ( BRB) March 7 , 2016 , decision upon remand to uphold the Chief Building Official ' s
declaration that the two historic farm silos located at 1041 Woodward Way are "dangerous structures" and not
structures that pose an " imminent danger" (also referred to as " imminent threat" ) . The appeal was heard by
City Council on April 19 , 2016 ,
STAFF RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends adoption of the Resolution
BACKGROUND / DISCUSSION
On September 18 , 2015 , the Chief Building Official determined that the two historic silos on Woodward , Inc . ,
property at 1041 Woodward Way were "dangerous structures , " but not an " imminent danger. "
On September 28 , 2015 , Woodward filed an appeal of the building official's determination to the BRB , stating
that the silos should have been declared an "imminent danger. "
On October 29 , 2015 , the BRB heard Woodward 's appeal . The BRB upheld the building official's determination
that the silos were "dangerous , " but not an " imminent danger. "
On November 12 , 2015 , Woodward appealed the BRB's decision to Council on the grounds that the BRB
failed to properly interpret and apply relevant provisions of the City Code .
On January 19 , 2016 , City Council heard the appeal . Based on the evidence in the record and presented at the
Council Hearing , and pursuant to City Code Section 2 -55(f)(2 ) , Council remanded the matter to the BRB for
rehearing . On remand , the BRB was directed to receive and consider evidence and analysis regarding the
effects of natural conditions and events of a one in ten -year probability on one or both of the silos to consider
whether one or both silos pose an imminent threat or danger as that term is defined in the International
Property Maintenance Code . This direction was set forth in City Council Resolution 2016 -009 .
On March 7 , 2016 , the BRB heard Woodward 's appeal . The BRB received and considered evidence and
analysis that indicated that wind would be the natural condition that would have the greatest impact upon the
silos . The BRB upon remand rendered a decision to uphold the determination of the Chief Building Official that
the silos are "dangerous" and not an " imminent danger. "
Item # 1 Page 1
Packet Pg . 4
Agenda Item 1
On March 21 , 2016 , Woodward appealed the BRB's March 7 , 2016 , decision to uphold the Chief Building
Officials determination asserting that the BRB failed to properly interpret and apply the City Code .
On April 19 , 20165 City Council heard the appeal of the March 7 , 2016 , BRB decision . City Council overturned
the Building Review Board ' s decision by a 5-2 vote ( Nays : Cunniff, Overbeck) and determined that the silos
were an imminent danger.
Additional background can be found in the AIS for the April 19 , 20167 appeal attached hereto . ( Attachment 1 )
ATTACHMENTS
1 . Appeal Agenda Item Summary, April 19 , 2016 (w/o attachments ) ( PDF )
Item # 1 Page 2
Packet Pg , 5
ATTACHMENT 1 1 . 1
Agenda Item 14
AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY April 19 , 2016
City Council
STAFF =
ii
Mike Gebo , Chief Building Official a
Laurie Kadrich , Director of PDT C
N
O
SUBJECT Cn
�a
Consideration of an Appeal of the Building Review Board 's March 7 , 2016 , Decision Regarding the Coy- E
Hoffman Silos , 1041 Woodward Way . _
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY O
U
Woodward , Inc . (Woodward ) is appealing the Building Review Board 's ( BRB ) decision , on remand from a c°'o
January 19 , 2016 appeal , to uphold the Chief Building Official ' s determination that two historic farm silos ,
located at 1041 Woodward Way, are "dangerous structures" and not structures that pose an " imminent
danger. " _
m
BACKGROUND I DISCUSSION
�a
Woodward 's new facility and office complex on 1041 Woodward Way, corner of South Lemay Avenue and
East Lincoln Avenue , was the original site of the Coy- Hoffman farmstead , a state designated historical site . A
barn , milkhouse , and two silos are what remain of the farmstead . The two silos are showing signs of concrete 3
decay around their bases . The cast in place silo has a slight list to the east and is out of plumb . The stave c
system silo is oblong at the upper third . N
ai
TM
Woodward appealed to Council , the Building Review Board 's ( BRB ) first decision of October 29 , 2015 , to
uphold the Building Official 's declaration that the silos are "dangerous" but not an " imminent danger" as defined C
in the adopted 2006 International Property Maintenance Code (IPMC) which states :
L
" Imminent Danger, a condition which could cause serious or life-threatening injury or death at any E
time. " E
Cn
On January 19 , 2016 , Council heard Woodward 's appeal and remanded the issue back to the BRB in E
Resolution 2016-009 Section 3 which states :
�a
Section 3. That based on the evidence in the record and presented at the Council Hearing, and
pursuant to City Code Section 2-55(0 (2), the matter shall be remanded to the BRB to receive and Q
consider evidence and analysis regarding the effects of natural conditions and events of a one in ten-
year probability on one or both of the silos to consider whether one or both poses an imminent threat m
or danger as that term is defined in the International Property Maintenance Code. " Q
On March 7 , 2016 , the BRB reheard the case as directed by Council . c
m
E
Engineer's reports
�a
Both Woodward ' s engineer, JVA, represented by Mr. Steve Carpenter, and the City' s engineer, Exponent, Q
represented by Mr. Paul Bennett, evaluated the effects of natural conditions upon the silos , including wind ,
snow, hail , rain , seismic or vibrations . Both engineers concluded that of the natural events reviewed , wind
Item # 14 Page 1
Packet Pg . 6
1 . 1
Agenda Item 14
would have the greatest impact on the silos and evaluated the silos using a one in ten-year wind event,
calculated to be winds of 85-90 mph . Both engineers agree that the stave silo is of more concern than the cast-
in-place silo .
The JVA report, updated on March 1 , 2016 , from Mr. Carpenter, concludes that based on analysis and a�
calculations , both silos could fail under loading associated with an 85-90 mph wind event . The Exponent First =
Supplemental Report from Mr. Bennett, performed calculations and included in its evaluation the silo's =_
performance in recent wind events as recorded by Colorado State University. Mr. Bennett indicated that the
last time winds were recorded on the order of 85 mph was 1999 , when a gust of 83 mph was recorded . Mr. (D
Bennett concluded that the silos that resisted 80+ mph winds in 1999 are likely to resist the wind effects of 85- a
90 mph in their current condition . Q
N
O
Dangerous vs Imminent Cn
�a
Council directed that the definition of imminent, as provided for in the adopted IPMC , shall be used in E
determining the silo's correct classification . The building official has classified the silos as dangerous c
structures . _
O
Building code language can be confusing when taken out of context or when not evaluated against other terms �?
used in that Code . To better understand the code intent of imminent , other terms of the IPMC are presented ;
M
• 108, 1 , 1 Substandard structures. A substandard structure is one that may pose a risk to
the life, health, property or safety of the occupants thereof or the public, even though it Y
does not constitute a dangerous structure as defined in Section 108. 1 . 5, either because =
m
the structure lacks the equipment necessary to protect or warn occupants in the event of E
fire, or because it contains substandard or missing equipment, systems or fixtures, or is
damaged, decayed, dilapidated, or structurally unsound. 14
Under the IPMC , substandard is considered the lowest level hazard of a structure and O
3
references that the structure does not constitute a dangerous structure .
0
• 108. 1 . 5 Dangerous structure or premises. A structure or premises is dangerous if any N
part, element or component thereof is no longer within its serviceability limit or strengthTOM
Q'
limit state as defined in this code or, when considered in totality, the structure or premises
pose an imminent threat to the health and safety of the public or the occupants of the a
structure or premises. Q
L
M
Dangerous , as written in Section 108 . 1 . 5 of the IPMC , identifies a higher level of hazard from E
"substandard " and the text would appear to place an even higher degree of hazard when E
describing imminent threat . Cn
E
W
• Chapter 2 Definitions; Imminent Danger. A condition which could cause serious or life- =
threatening injury or death at any time.
m
When interpreted in context to other terms in the IPMC , imminent danger takes on an °1
immediacy not stated or indicated in either the substandard or dangerous references . It is
Q
understood that any dangerous structure which is no longer within its serviceability limit or m
a
strength limit state could have a condition which could cause a serious or life-threatening a
injury or death , the key to imminent is the perceived immediacy of the hazard as stated as at Q
any time . _
m
E
Conclusion
�a
The Building Official has determined that the Woodward silos are dangerous structures ; however an imminent Q
danger has not been established . Woodward has argued that the silos could cause serious or life-threatening
injury or death when wind forces of 85-90 mph are applied . The BRB , on remand , has ruled to uphold the
Item # 14 Page 2
Packet Pg . 7
1 . 1
Agenda Item 14
building official 's declaration that the silos are dangerous and not imminent.
Woodward has been ordered to provide to the City a "plan of protection" and to stabilize and repair the silos so
as to abate the hazard and remove the dangerous classification . N
a�
ATTACHMENTS
1 . City Clerk's Public Hearing Notice ( PDF)
2 . Notice of Appeal , March 21 , 2016 ( PDF ) a
3 . Materials Provided to the Building Review Board ( PDF) Q-
4 . Staff presentation to Building Review Board ( PDF ) y
5 . Applicant presentation to Building Review Board ( PDF ) c
6 . Paul Bennett, Exponent, presentation to Building Review Board ( PDF ) y
7 . Exhibits presented at Building Review Board Hearing ( PDF )
8 . Verbatim transcript ( PDF ) E
9 . Staff presentation to Council ( PDF )
O
U
m
M
N
_
d
E
L
C�
O
3
v
r
TOM
N
'i
CL
a
L
M
E
E
Cn
E
a
CL
CL
a
E
a
Item # 14 Page 3
Packet Pg . 8
RESOLUTION 2016-038
OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FORT COLLINS
MAKING FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW REGARDING THE
APPEAL OF THE MARCH 7, 2016, BUILDING REVIEW BOARD DECISION ON
REMAND REGARDING THE COY-HOFFMAN SILOS , 1041 WOODWARD WAY
WHEREAS, Woodward, Inc . , ("Woodward") is the owner of two silos (the "Silos")
located on its property within municipal limits at 1041 Woodward Way; and
WHEREAS , on September 18 , 2015 , the City of Fort Collins Chief Building Official (the
"CBO") issued his determination that the Silos were dangerous but not imminently dangerous ;
and
WHEREAS, Woodward appealed the September 18, 2015 , CBO determination to the
City of Fort Collins Building Review Board (the "BRB") ; and
WHEREAS, on October 29 , 2015 , the BRB heard the appeal and adopted a motion
upholding the CBO ' s September 18 , 2015 , determination; and
WHEREAS, Woodward appealed the October 29, 2015 , BRB decision to the City
Council; and
WHEREAS , on January 19, 2016, the City Council heard the appeal and remanded the
matter for further BRB consideration with direction as stated in Council Resolution 2016 -009 ;
and
WHEREAS, on March 7, 2016, the BRB heard the appeal on remand and adopted a
motion upholding the CBO ' s September 18 , 2015 , determination; and
WHEREAS , Woodward appealed the March 7 , 2016 , BRB decision to the City Council
by filing its Notice of Appeal on March 21 , 2016 ; and
WHEREAS , the Notice of Appeal claimed that the BRB failed to properly interpret and
apply the City Code in making its decision at the March 7 , 2016 , remand hearing; and
WHEREAS , on April 19, 2016, the City Council, after notice given in accordance with
Chapter 2, Article I1, Division 3 , of the City Code, considered the Appeal, reviewed the record
on appeal and the applicable City Code provisions, and heard presentations from the
representatives for Woodward and the parties-in-interest opposed to the Appeal (the "Council
Hearing") ; and
WHEREAS, the evidence for City Council consideration at the Council Hearing
consisted of the evidence presented at the Council Hearing plus the evidence contained in the
records of the October 29, 2015 , and March 7, 20165 BRB hearings, and the January 19 , 2016,
Council hearing; and
- 1 -
Packet Pg . 9
WHEREAS, after discussion, the City Council found and concluded based on the
evidence in the record and presented at the Council Hearing that:
I . The BRB failed to properly interpret and apply the City Council direction on remand
regarding the consideration of the effect of natural conditions and events of a one -in-
ten year probability on the Silos ; and
2 . The BRB failed to properly interpret and apply the term "imminent danger" as such
term is defined in IPMC Section 202, adopted pursuant to City Code Section 5 -46,
and City Code Section 5 -47( 12) ; and
3 . The evidence established that the Silos are an "imminent danger" as such term is
defined in the City Code ; and
4. The Silos pose an imminent threat to life, health, and property; and
5 . The BRB decision to uphold the September 18 , 2015 , CBO determination is
overturned.
WHEREAS , City Code Section 2-55 (g) provides that no later than the date of its next
regular meeting after the hearing of an appeal, City Council shall adopt, by resolution, findings
of fact in support of its decision on the Appeal.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
FORT COLLINS that, pursuant to Section 2-55(g) of the City Code, the City Council hereby
makes and adopts the following findings of fact and conclusions :
Section 1 . That the grounds for appeal as stated in the Notice of Appeal conform to
the requirements of Section 2-48 of the City Code.
Section 2 . That based on the evidence in the record and presented at the Council
Hearing, the recitals set forth above are adopted as findings of fact.
Section 3 . That the BRB failed to properly interpret and apply the City Code at the
March 7, 2016, remand hearing.
Section 4 . That the BRB decision to uphold the September 18 , 2015 , CBO
determination is overturned.
Section 5 . That the Silos are an "imminent danger" as such term is defined in the
City Code and pose an imminent threat to life, health, and property
Section 6 . That the CBO is directed to forthwith issue an order to Woodward to
demolish or repair the Silos on the basis that the Silos are an imminent threat to life, health, and
property.
-2-
Packet Pg . 10
Section 7 . That adoption of this Resolution shall constitute the final action of the City
Council in accordance with City Code Section 2-55 (g) .
Passed and adopted at a special meeting of the Council of the City of Fort Collins this
26th day of April, A.D . 2016 .
Mayor
ATTEST :
City Clerk
- 3 -
Packet Pg . 11
City of •
F6rt Collins
AGENDA
Wade Troxell , Mayor Council Information Center (CIC )
Gerry Horak , District 6 , Mayor Pro Tern City Hall West
Bob Overbeck, District 1 300 LaPorte Avenue
Ray Martinez, District 2 Fort Collins , Colorado
Gino Campana , District 3
Kristin Stephens , District 4 Cablecast on City Cable Channel 14
Ross Cunniff, District 5 and Channel 881 on the Comcast cable system
Carrie Daggett Darin Atteberry Wanda Winkelmann
City Attorney City Manager City Clerk
The City of Fort Collins will make reasonable accommodations for access to City services , programs , and activities
and will make special communication arrangements for persons with disabilities. Please call 221 -6515 (TDD 224-
6001 ) for assistance .
City Council Work Session
April 26 , 2016
After the Special Meeting , which begins at 6 : 00 p . m .
• CALL TO ORDER.
1 . Broadband Strategic Plan Update- Market Demand Overview. (staff: Seonah Kendall , Mike
Beckstead ; 15 minute staff presentation ; 1 hour discussion )
The purpose of this item is to provide City Council an update on the Broadband Strategic Plan and
review the recent findings of the Broadband Market Demand Study, formation of the Broadband
Citizen Committee and Expert Review Committee , and next steps .
2 . Mountain Vista Area Open Lands Preservation Scenario . (staff: Cameron Gloss ; 10 minute staff
presentation ; 45 minute discussion )
The purpose of this item is to evaluate an open land preservation scenario for the Mountain Vista
area that maintains the area 's overall projected jobs and housing , but configures future development
patterns to conserve more land for local food production , access to nature , and innovative housing
opportunities .
3 . Refreshing Fort Collins Parks . (staff: Kurt Friesen , Mike Calhoon ; 10 minute staff presentation ; 1
hour discussion )
The purpose of this item is to inform Council about refreshing Fort Collins parks . Fort Collins parks
are aging and in need of improvements in order for them to adequately meet the growing demands
of today' s users . Currently, there are two programs in place for construction and infrastructure
replacement in parks , the park build-out and park life cycle programs . These programs provide
funding for construction of new parks in the city and replacement or restoration of existing park
components . Both of these programs have inadequate funding . Currently there is not a program in
place for adapting parks to meet the changing needs of park users . There are numerous reasons to
City of Fort Collins Page 1
refresh parks . These include keeping pace with changing trends in recreation , adapting to changing
community needs , providing equitable park experiences city wide , connecting people with nature ,
and replacing and improving antiquated infrastructure.
A proposed process for refreshing parks has been identified , and is currently being implemented at
City Park. The steps for this process include project goal identification , preparation of initial concepts ,
gathering community input, master plan development, phase I project identification , and phased
construction based on available funding . The focus of the park refresh program should be on
community parks , as these typically are more programmed than neighborhood parks . It is estimated
that approximately 50 million dollars are needed to refresh 4 aging community parks . There are
numerous benefits to parks , including economic benefits as illustrated by studies completed by the
National Recreation and Parks Association and Trust for Public Land .
• OTHER BUSINESS ,
• ADJOURNMENT,
City of Fort Collins Page 2
DATE : April 26 , 2016
STAFF : Seonah Kendall , Economic Policy & Project Manager WORK SESSION ITEM
Mike Beckstead , Chief Financial Officer City Council
SUBJECT FOR DISCUSSION
Broadband Strategic Plan Update-Market Demand Overview.
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
The purpose of this item is to provide City Council an update on the Broadband Strategic Plan and review the
recent findings of the Broadband Market Demand Study, formation of the Broadband Citizen Committee and
Expert Review Committee , and next steps .
GENERAL DIRECTION SOUGHT AND SPECIFIC QUESTIONS TO BE ANSWERED
This is a Broadband progress report, which will overview the recently completed market demand study and
provides Council with an update on the plan for 2016 .
BACKGROUND / DISCUSSION
On November 3 , 2015 , 83% of Fort Collins voters supported Ballot Issue 2B , which overturned Senate Bill 05 -
152 , removing legal barriers for the City's involvement, direct or indirect, in providing telecommunication services .
This vote allows the City and citizens to consider and pursue the best decisions based on the needs and desires
of the community. It is important to note that the November election did not commit the City to providing
broadband services in Fort Collins , nor does it mean that such services would be available immediately.
Additionally, in late 2015 , the City of Fort Collins engaged Uptown Services LLC , a Colorado consulting firm , to
provide six deliverables related to the City's exploration of broadband services :
• Asset Report and Map(s )
• Broadband Service Market Demand Report
• Target Broadband Standards Report
• Feasibility Analysis - by business model
• Strategic , Financial , Operational and Technological Risk and Opportunities Report - by business model
• Broadband Strategic Plan Synopsis and Recommendation Report
This update will focus on the recently completed market demand study and the implications to the financial
feasibility analysis and overall broadband plan .
Fort Collins Market Demand Study
In March 2016 , Uptown Services completed three market segment ( residential , small business , large
business/institutional ) studies to identify unique needs (services) by sector of population and/or geographical
areas , and estimate demand and take- rate (i . e . , potential subscribership rate ) assumptions by sector. The market
research results will contribute to the feasibility analysis as inputs to model development. The methodology and
research parameters used for the Fort Collins Market Demand Study include :
Packet Pg . 3
April 26 , 2016 Page 2
Market Research Research Parameters
Segment Methodology
. Sample size of 400 : . ith 95 % Confidence Interval . . ith a t 4 . 9 sample
error
Residential . Weighted by age decile to Fort Collins actual age distribution from
Consumers Quantitative 2010 Census data
Phone . Screened for telecom ;'broadband decision maker and employment
Surveys bias
• Sample size of 50 :vith 95110 Confidence Interval . ith a t 4 . 9 sample
Small and error
Medium Sized . Screened for telecomibroadband decision maker and employment
Businesses bias
• Located within the city limits and not home- based
• Has internet
Large . Responses aggregated for confidentiality
Employers Qualitative . Evaluate the current and future demand and need of the commercial
and Depth and institutional segment
Institutional Interviev., . Qualify interest and level of support for the development and
Partners implementation of fiber broadband infrastructure
Market Demand Study Findings - Residential Survey
The residential market demand survey asks questions around Internet, voice and video services as part of the
overall inputs for the financial feasibility analysis . A high speed Internet service is the primary focus of the
broadband study, but the appeal of bundling services at a minimal cost is being investigated . The study
confirmed that almost all Fort Collins households use the Internet . Governing . com 's "America's Most Connected
Cities" stated that 91 .4% of Fort Collins residents have at least one wired connection . Ninety-nine percent of Fort
Collins households surveyed use Internet at home . Of these connected homes , cable modem and digital
subscriber lines (DSL ) have the vast majority of the market share at 94% . Additionally, the study indicated that
Internet usage is prevalent across all income and age groups .
Questions around customer service satisfaction levels were also surveyed , as this plays a role in the market
demand for alternative broadband services . Respondents were asked to rank customer satisfaction from a scale
of 1 - 10 , with 10 being "totally satisfied " and 1 being " not at all satisfied , " by service categories : cable television ,
satellite television , non- pay television ( i . e . , antenna , basic channels ) , DSL , cable modem , telephone and electric
utility. The average customer satisfaction was high for electric utility at a mean rating of 8 . 7 , while the average
mean for DSL was 6 . 8 and cable modem was 6 . 6 . Sixty-four percent of the respondents rated the City's Utility
brand a 9 or 10 rating . Other internet services had significantly lower customer service satisfaction selection of 9
or 10 ratings .
Lower prices , increased Internet speed and reliability dominate the wish list of service improvements respondents
identified for broadband . Branding and bundling were secondary in importance . Additionally, 81 % of respondents
acknowledged the importance of having low cost, high -speed Internet.
In addition to questions about current broadband services , market share and customer service satisfaction , the
broadband market demand survey asked respondents about their interest and purchase intent (willingness to
switch ) for broadband services , if offered by an alternative fiber network provider. Seventy percent of
respondents would definitely or probably switch to the fiber network for Internet services . Furthermore , if
respondents answered `definitely' or ` probably' switch to the fiber network for Internet services , they were asked
the reason for the switch . The top three reasons given by respondents for a switch were : need for higher
capacity, lower prices and the City as a preferred provider. Among the list of potential providers , 45% of
respondents stated the City as the preferred provider, most likely due to brand recognition and customer service
reputation . Notably, the City as a preferred provider, as well as purchase intent, ranked higher among younger
households (20-34 years of age ) .
Packet Pg . 4
April 26 , 2016 Page 3
Market Demand Study Findings - Small to Mid -Size Business Survey
A similar survey was deployed to the small -to- mid-size business (SMB) segment. The survey found that Comcast
and CenturyLink are the only two Internet Service Providers ( ISPs ) with SMB market share in Fort Collins (about
96% of respondents) . Two-thirds of SMB respondents in Fort Collins are under contract for their Internet and
voice services . Additionally, SMB respondents had similar responses to the residential respondents in regard to
customer satisfaction by service and customer needs . One item to note is that SMBs put a larger emphasis on
the need for improved reliability, most likely due to reliance on technology and the Internet for business
operations .
Market Demand Study Findings - Large Business/Institution Qualitative Survey
The objective of the large business/institution qualitative survey is to qualify the current and future capacity needs ,
unmet needs , and interest and level of support for the development and implementation of a fiber broadband
network . Some of those interviewed could be potential customers as major commercial accounts , or they could
be an influencer in the community. Uptown Services conducted 24 interviews and aggregated the responses for
confidentiality.
Uptown Services found that due to multiple incumbent providers competing in the large business/institution
segment, fiber is not only deployed , but activated to many of these business locations . Advance data needs are
being met with dedicated connections for the business/institutions sole usage . However, many of the large
business/institutions interviewed would consider the City as a fiber network provider - lower price was a key factor
for these firms .
Take Rate
The consultants use a conservative research technique from the Packaged Goods sector to estimate potential
subscribership rate . This technique has been utilized for over 30 -years and was developed as firms realized
research respondents , for various reasons , overstate purchase intentions during research as compared to the
eventual penetration of a product that was commercially launched .
Municipal systems , which are not-for- profit enterprises , measure a broadband project "success" by the level of
their "take rate" - that is , the percentage of potential subscribers who are offered the service that actually
subscribe . Uptown Services is estimating that the take rate for residential Internet service in Fort Collins at 38 . 8%
and 45% for small business (i . e . , 38 . 8% of residents are estimated to subscribe to the fiber network , if offered ) .
Small business penetration is over a 7-year period compared to5-years for residential (consumer behavior
indicates that small business owners will first try the service at home before determining whether to switch at their
business) .
Online Broadband Survey
Due to interest, staff made the majority of the residential phone survey available online to anyone who wanted to
participate . This was not intended to be statistically valid , but rather to allow more residents to engage in the
conversation . Over 1 , 800 responses were received and the results were in line with the statistically valid ,
residential phone survey. The exception being that the online questionnaire saw a higher response from younger
demographics . Full results can be viewed online at fcgov. com/broadband .
Staff reviewed and themed the write- in comments for the following questions :
What would you like to see most improved from your current services ( broadband , cableTV, Internet, local
telephone ) and ; any additional comments?
Staff received 1 ,453 comments addressing improvements and themed them by the following categories :
• Speed (33% )
• Price (26 % )
• Reliability ( 17% )
Packet Pg . 5
April 26 , 2016 Page 4
• Customer Service ( 10% )
• Miscellaneous ( 14% )
The 687 "additional comments" were themed in the following categories :
• Support for a municipal broadband option and/or addressed broadband as a utility. (27% )
• Dissatisfaction with current service or providers and/or addressed the need for additional competition .
(26% )
• A desire for fiber/Google fiber/better infrastructure . ( 19% )
• Thank you for the opportunity to weigh in and for looking at this initiative . ( 15% )
• Need for affordable , reliable , high speed service for the community as a whole , business needs , or our
economic future . (8% )
• Miscellaneous or other. ( 15 % )
Broadband Citizen Committee
The core team has convened a group of 18 citizens representing a variety of geography, skill - and user-level , and
overall broadband interest. The purpose for this citizen group is to :
• Review and discuss materials provided by City staff and Uptown Services ;
• Help staff design communications for the broader public ; and
• Be a liaison to the public regarding current process , engagement opportunities , and to share questions .
The Broadband Citizen Committee has met twice since the beginning of 2016 , and staff anticipates the group
meeting about every six weeks throughout 2016 .
Expert Review Panel
City staff has worked to put together a Broadband Expert Review Panel (" ERP" ) . The purpose of the Broadband
ERP is to :
• Provide independent, expert technical review during the development of the City's broadband plan to
ensure that critical questions are posed and assessed ;
• Review and discuss documents provided by City staff and Uptown Services , LLC to ensure that the
project' s feasibility; and
• Guide the preparation of the overall Broadband plan through the panels review of methodologies and
assumptions , and to ensure that the assumptions in the plan are appropriate and reasonable .
The Broadband ERP will convene in Fort Collins on May 2 , 2016 . The first meeting with the Broadband ERP will
familiarize the panelists to the Fort Collins community, staff and the project.
Members of the Broadband ERP include :
• Lev Gonick , co-founder and Chief Executive Officer of OneCommunity. Mr. Gonick and OneCommunity
was recognized by Broadband Communities with their Cornerstone Award for " using fiber to build an
inclusive society and empower individuals . "
• Robert Houlihan , Chief Technology Officer of Cedar Falls Utilities . Mr. Houlihan manages the Cedar Falls
Utilities network infrastructure , which services over 13 , 000 Internet and cable TV subscribers .
• Blair Levin , Senior Fellow at Brookings Institute . Mr. Levin ' s served as Executive Director of the Federal
Communications Commission 's ( FCC) 2009 National Broadband Plan and as the FCC Chief of Staff from
1993 - 1997 .
• Deb Socia , Executive Director of Next Century Cities , a new initiative that strives to support community
leaders across the United States as they seek to ensure that all have access to fast, affordable and
reliable Internet. Prior to Ms . Socia ' s role at Next Century Cities , she was the Executive Director of the
Tech Goes Home program , whose mission is to ensure digital equity through training , hardware and low
cost Internet access .
Packet Pg . 6
April 26 , 2016 Page 5
Next Steps
With the completion of the broadband service market demand report, Uptown Services and City staff has begun
work on a 15-year pro forma forecast. As part of the greater financial analysis , Uptown Services and staff will
work to complete an analysis of various business structure options by exploring strategic , financial and
organizational implications of each business structure .
The feasibility analysis methodology creates a market-driven demand planning tool that is flexible and will allow
for various options and strategies rather than a detailed business plan of a single option . Based on the findings of
the financial and strategic analysis , the broadband core team will engage citizens , businesses and City Council
(the next work session is scheduled for August 23 , 2016) to present findings , goals and strategies of the
broadband plan . Following this work and community outreach , staff anticipates having a recommendation
outlining a long-term broadband plan in late fall 2016 .
ATTACHMENTS
1 . Fort Collins Market Demand Report ( PDF )
2 . Powerpoint presentation ( PDF )
Packet Pg . 7
1 1
UPTOWN
SERVIC ES . LLC
FTTP Feasibility Study
for =
The City of Fort Collins
Broadband Market Demand Report
March 2016
Uptown Services, LLC
Dave Stockton & Neil Shaw, Principals
Packet • •
ie
UPTOWN CONTENTS .
SIRVIC IS . LLC
This report summarizes the research findings of 3 specific market segments in Ft . Collins :
1 . Residential Market
2 Quantitative Survey Design
2 Consumption Patterns
2 =
Satisfaction & Attribute Importance
2 Demand Estimation .
2 . Small Business Market
2 Same as residential
3 . Large Business Market
2 Depth Interview Participants
2 Current Service Configuration and Price Levels
2 Available Service Features and Needs
2 Satisfaction & Attribute Importance
2 Demand Estimation
4/20/2016 Study conducted by Uptown Services, LLC
9
1 . 1
m
Y
L
C�
C
M
ma
Q
D
FL
W
M
L
N
0
ML
W
Residential
, • • • Survey M
v
_ 0
nt Broadband Services • • • QN�
I.L
M
E
0
W
Y
L
CM
C
Cn
0
U
0
LL
a�
AdE
t�
M
Packet Pg . 10
ie
UPTOWN DESIGN FRAMEWORK
SERVICES . LLC
2 Area of Interest : universe of • 60 , 000 households ( HHs )
❖ Total sample size of 400 respondents .
❖ 95 % Confidence Interval with ± 4 . 9 sample error )
2 Results weighted to reflect Ft . Collins actual age distribution from 2010 Census -
data ( age of householder )
2 Respondents screened to ensure
❖ Decision - maker for telecommunications and entertainment services in the .
home
❖ Respondents with immediate family members employed by any of the
following were excluded :
The City of Fort Collins -
CenturyLink
Comcast
4/20/2016 Study conducted by Uptown Services, LLC
Packet - .
ie
UPTOWN INTERNET SERVICE PURCHASING BEHAVIOR
SERVICESALC
Incidence of Internet Households
2 99 % of Fort Collins households use the 1 %
Internet at home
2 Cable Modem and DSL have the vast
majority of market share at 94%
99 % -
No Internet Have Internet
Internet Market Share
(Households)
4% 2%
37%
57% -
Dial Up DSL ■ Cable Modem Satellite Other
4/20/2016 Study conducted by Uptown Services, LLC
. g
kAk�—
UPTOWN INTERNET SERVICE PURCHASING BEHAVIOR
SERVICES , LLC
Monthly Internet Spend
2 Comcast and CenturyLink are the only
two ISPs with material market share in 30% . '
Fort Collins
2
Stated average monthly Internet spend 20%
is $ 46 per household
10%
0% 7
< $ 30 $ 30 $40 $ 50 $ 60 $ 70 > $ 70
Internet Access Provider Market Share '
61 %
37 %
1 % 0 % 1 %
Comcast CenturyLink FRII Rise Broadband Other
4/20/2016 Study conducted by Uptown Services, LLC
Packet . g
ie
UPTOWN INTERNET USAGE BY HOUSEHOLD DEMOGRAPHIC
SERVICES . LLC
Incidence of No Internet by Income
2 Internet usage is prevalent across 20%
all income and age groups
15%
2 Overall , the type of Internet does
not vary significantly across age 10%
groups
5 % —
0% .
Up to $ 50k $ 50k - $ 100k - $ 150k - > $ 200k
$ 100k $ 150k $ 200k
Incidence of No Internet by Age Internet Type by Age '
20% Cable Modem DSL Satellite
80% -
15 %
60%
10% -
40%
o •
5 /0 20%
0% — 0% —
20 - 34 35 - 44 45 - 54 55 - 64 65 - 74 20 - 34 35 - 44 45 - 54 55 - 64 65 - 74
4/20/2016 Study conducted by Uptown Services, LLC
. g
ie
UPTOWN VOICE SERVICES USAGE
SERVICES . LLC
Number of Phone Lines in the Home
2 Wireless substitution is lower than the =
national average at 24% of HHs 64%
2 A further 9 % of wireline phone users will National Average
%drop for wireless in the next 12 months 4146 / 42 %
Longmont
2 The average number of lines is . -
❖ All Households : 0 . 9 24% Ft Collins
❖ Wireline Households : 1 . 1
7% $% 6% 5 %
Q12o "How likely are you to disconnect the
wired phone line and only use your cell... "
None 1 2 3 or More =
Source : National Health Interview Survey, July- December 2013 '
Definitely Will
6% Households Without Wireline Phone Service '
67% by Age
Probably Will 12 %
Might/ Might Not 14% -
Probably Won 't 24% 10 /°° 16% 14% '
6%
Definitely Won 't 44%
20 - 34 35 - 44 45 - 54 55 - 64 65 - 74
4/20/2016 Study conducted by Uptown Services, LLC0 Packet I
- .
ie
UPTOWN WIRELINE PHONE MARKET SHARE
SERVICES . LLC
Q8 : "Who is your local phone service
2 CenturyLink still maintains market share
provider ?"
leadership of the residential voice market
2 Stated residential spending on local 24%
phone service averages about $ 34 0io 44%
0
monthly per HH
32 % -
CenturyLink Comcast TDS No Wireline
Monthly Local Phone Spending
30%
20%
10% -
0%
$ 20 $ 30 $40 $ 50 > $ 50 DK
4/20/2016 Study conducted by Uptown Services, LLC
P
ie
UPTOWN VIDEO SERVICES PURCHASING BEHAVIOR
SERVICESALC
Q2 : "For TV service, do you have.. . "
2 Only 68 % of households use traditional
s%
pay TV ( cable or satellite dish ) 10% . '
2 In Fort Collins today, 32 % of households 44%
do not have Pay TV 14%
2 The national average for HHs without Pay
TV is 24% ( Pew Research ) 24%
2 Stated average monthly spend : "
Cable : $ 70
Cable Satellite Off Air
Satellite : $ 68 Online Other/ None
Monthly Pay TV Spend
40%
30%
20%
Cable •
Satellite
10%
0%
$ 25 $50 $ 75 $ 100 $ 125 + Don 't
4/20/2016 Study conducted by Uptown Services, LLC Know
ie
UPTOWN EMERGING VIDEO SERVICES
SERVICES . LLC
Q6 : "Do you sometimes watch TV online ?"
2 Over-the -Top ( OTT ) or online TV viewing (Among Pay TV Households)
has recently become a material substitute
service for traditional cable TV with a
majority of households using OTT
36%
2 Among younger households, up to 35 %
are using OTT or Off Air as a substitute
63 %
service
2 Uptown estimates a further 7 % of pay TV „
users in Fort Collins will `cut the cord ' in
the next 12 months
Yes No
Households Using Substitute Service In Place of Likelihood of Cancelling Pay TV for OTT ,
Pay TV by Age (among all pay TV users)
23%
Definitely Not 41%
15 % 15 % 15 % °
14 % Probably Not 31%
5 % Might/ Might Not — 16%
2 % I •
1 � Probably — 7%
20 - 34 35 - 44 45 - 54 55 - 64 65 - 74 Definitely 5%
4/20/2016 ■ Online ■ Off-Air Study conducted by Uptown Services, LLC
IPacket ' •
ie
UPTOWN BUNDLING
SIRVIC IS . LLC
2 Across all households in Fort Collins Incidence of Triple Play Bundle
40 % have all 3 services from a single
provider. This is higher due to
incidence of wireline voice service 20%
2 The importance of bundling is low 40%
when compared to our 2013 =
Longmont survey
Importance of Having All 3 Services from a Single Provider
0%
(Among All Respondents)
Ft Collins Longmont Have All 3 Services From Multiple
30% 29% Providers
,
24% Have All 3 From Single Provider
22%
19% 20%
18% Do Not Have All 3 Services
15 %
13 %
10%
Very Somewhat Neither Somewhat Very
Important Important Unimportant Unimportant
4/20/2016 Study conducted by Uptown Services, LLC '
Packet . g
ie
UPTOWN SATISFACTION RATINGS
SERVICES , LLC
Satisfaction Rating by Service/Service Provider
(Mean Rating on a 1 -10 Scale)
10 . 0 Ft Collins Longmont 8 . 7 8 . 6
7 . 7 7 . 5 7 . 5 -
8 . 0 6 . 7 6 . 7 6 . 8 7 . 0 7 . 2
6 . 6 6 . 6
5 . 6 5 . 7
6 . 0
4 . 0
2 . 0
0 . 0 -
Cable TV Satellite TV Non - Pay TV DSL Cable Modem Telephone Utility
Satisfaction Rating by Service/Service Provider
(Percent Rating a '9' or '10')
0
80 % 64% 65 %
60% -
0
40% 36 0 31% 29 •
23% 0 23% � 9°i 23% 0 31%
20%
12 % 15% '
0%
Cable TV Satellite TV Non - Pay TV DSL Cable Modem Telephone Utility
4/20/2016 Study conducted by Uptown Services, LLC
ie
UPTOWN SATISFACTION RATING BENCHMARKS
SERVICESALC
2 The chart below compares the results of this study with 24 other markets where Uptown has
completed similar quantitative research : . '
Northern Ohio (2) Washington North Carolina Oregon (2)
Southern Ohio Wisconsin Kansas (2) Alabama
Georgia Oklahoma (2) New York Arkansas
Tennessee (4) Michigan Kentucky Colorado (2)
Satisfaction Rating by Service/Service Provider
(Mean Rating on a 1 to 10 Scale)
9
8
7
6 — —
5
Cable Satellite TV DSL Cable Modem Telephone utility
4/20/2016
. g
ie
UPTOWN ATTRIBUTE IMPORTANCE
SERVICES . LLC
2 While reliability and price are always important, Internet speed has dramatically increased in
importance over the last several years . Bundling and Brand are secondary in importance to
other attributes . . .
Importance Rating of Select Broadband Service Attributes
(Mean Rating on a 1 -5 Scale)
4 . 8 4 . 8
5 . 0 4 . 4 4 . 4 4 . 4 4 . 4 4 . 4 4 . 5 ,
4 . 0
3 . 0
3 . 1 3 . 0 — - '
2 . 8
'
2 . 0
1 . 0
0 . 0 .
Brand Service Bundle Customer Internet Speed Price Reliability
Service
Ft Collins Longmont
4/20/2016 Study conducted by Uptown Services, LLC
P
ie
UPTOWN IMPORTANCE OF DOWNLOAD VS . UPLOAD
SERVICESALC
z -
Question 33 : "What aspect of Internet speed is most important ? "
Importance of Internet Speed on Download vs . Upload
59 % 59 % -
37 %
34% -
4%
1 %
Download Most Important Upload Most Important Both Important
Ft Collins Longmont
4/20/2016 Study conducted by Uptown Services, LLC
Packet - .
ie
UPTOWN CUSTOMER NEEDS .
SERVICES . LLC
z Lower prices and increased Internet speed dominate the wish list for services improvement as Internet speed has gained importance . . .
Q32 : "What would you like to see most improved from your current broadband
services ?"
Lower Prices 37 /o 49 /
'
Increased Internet Speed 29 % 34%
o
Reliability 16 / 34% '
Longmont
15 % Ft Collins =
Nothing 10 %
9 %
Customer Service 10 %
%
Channel Selection 4% '
Bundling Service 1 %
4/20/2016 Study conducted by Uptown Services, LLC
ie
UPTOWN IMPORTANCE OF LOW COST HIGH - SPEED INTERNET
SERVICESALC
z
Question 299 " In your opinion , is the availability of low- cost, high - speed Internet important
to the future local economy ? "
Importance of Having Low Cost High-Speed Internet
Ft Collins Longmont
81 %
68 %
25 %
14%
4% 2% 2 % 1
Very Important Somewhat Neither Somewhat Very Unimportant
Important Unimportant
4/20/2016 Study conducted by Uptown Services, LLC
- .
kAk�-
UPTOWN ELECTRIC BILL SURCHARGE .
SERVICES , LLC
2 Over half of Ft Collins households support the payment of a monthly $ 5 surcharge to help -
fund the new fiber network . . .
Q34a "Would you support adding a $5 monthly fee to your electric bill to partially fund the
construction and operation of this network for the first 24 months of operation ?"
Ft Collins Longmont
57%
1 would support •
21 %
I would be neutral 35 �
22 %
1 would not support 22 %
4/20/2016
1 . 1
m
Y
L
C�
C
Q
D
FL
W
�a
L
N
0
ML
Residential
W
Quantitative v
0
FTTP Market Potential
fC
E
0
d
Y
L
C�
C
Cn
0
U
0
LL
a�
E
t�
ca
a
Packet Pg . 27
ie
UPTOWN PURCHASE INTENT
SERVICES . LLC
2 70 % of respondents indicated they would definitely or probably switch to the =
FTTP system for Internet service . . .
Q25 - 27 : "How likely would you be to subscribe to [ insert service ] if it were 10 °0 less
than Comcast or CenturyLink charges ?
100%
75%
50%
25%
0%
Internet Phone Video
■ Definitely 40% 25 % 19%
Probably 30% 31 % 32%
Might/ Might Not 19 % 17% 19% .
■ Probably Not 6% 11 % 17%
Definitely Not 3 % 13 % 10%
■ Don 't Know 3 % 3 % 3 %
4/20/2016 Study conducted by Uptown Services, LLC 21
' •
ie
UPTOWN PENETRATION CALCULATIONS
SERVICES . LLC
2 Uptown uses a ' Likert Scale ' with Overstatement Adjustment
❖ Conservative research techniques from the Packaged Goods sector
❖ Clearly specify purchase intent vs . " interest " and removes overstatement bias
2 Example : " How likely would you be to subscribe ? "
❖ Definitely Would 21 . 5 % x 70% = 15 . 0%
❖ Probably Would 35 . 6 % x 30% = 10 . 7 %
❖ Might/ Might Not 20 . 0% x 10% = 2 . 0% "
❖ Probably Would Not 10 . 4% 27 . 7 % = Penetration Estimate
❖ Definitely Would Not 4 . 4%
❖ Don ' t Know 8 . 1 %
Residential Longmont
(Terminal Year 5 Eroded ) (Terminal )
4/20/2016 Study conducted by Uptown Services, LLC
ie
UPTOWN I NTE RN ET MARKET SHARE IMPACT
SERVICES . LLC
Purchase Intent by Internet Connection
2 Expected Internet purchase intent by (Top Two Box at 10% Discount)
current connection type : -
Cable Modem DSL Satellite
❖ Cable Modem User : 43 % would switch
❖ DSL User : 36 % would switch 47% -
❖ Satellite User : 36% would switch 33 % 35 % 36%
27% 26% -
Definitely Would Probably Would
Current Internet Market Share Internet Market Share Post FTTP System
(Households) (Households)
4% 2 -
2% 2 %
37% 33 /o 0 39 %
57% •
24%
FTTP System DSL Cable Modem ■ Satellite ■ Other FTTP System DSL Cable Modem Satellite Other
April 16 Study conducted by Uptown Services, LLC
P
ie
UPTOWN PROVIDER PREFERENCE
SERVICES . LLC
2 The majority of respondents, when given the choice, would prefer to receive high speed
Internet from the City . . .
Q28 : 'Among the following list of potential providers, who would you prefer to
receive high -speed Internet service from ? "
Ft Collins Longmont
52 %
45 %
23 %
19 %
11 % 9 % 15 '`l2 %
8 /
4% 3 % .
tJ�\�� �A
< \000�` a�a�a oJ�ao�
��� Lo �r �o �03 �� o�
O
� P
4/20/2016 Study conducted by Uptown Services, LLC
Packet - .
ie
UPTOWN PROJECT APPEAL BY AGE
SERVICES . LLC
z In terms of both preference for the City as well as purchase intent, younger households -
( 20- 34 ) place the greatest value on the fiber project and the City 's role . . .
88%
78 % 78 % 81 %
71% -
54% 51 % o -
49 /o
44% 43 % '-
37 % 34% 35
3
23 %
20 - 34 35 - 44 45 - 54 55 - 64 65 - 74
■ Prefer City As Provider Low Cost High Speed Internet ' Very Important ' Definitely ' Subscribe
4/20/2016 Study conducted by Uptown Services, LLC
. g
ie
UPTOWN MOTIVATION TO CHANGE INTERNET PROVIDER
SERVICESALC
z -
Question 31 : " In stating that you would `definitely ' or ` probably' subscribe to the fiber
network for Internet service , what is the primary reason you would switch ? "
39 %
36 % -
20 % ;
4%
Prefer City as Provider Prefer the Lower Price Prefer Higher Capacity Other Reason
4/20/2016 Study conducted by Uptown Services, LLC
Packet - .
ie
UPTOWN PURCHASE INTENT BENCHMARKING
SERVICESALC
Terminal Penetration by Service
(Across all Tested Price Points)
50%
40
30% ♦ • ♦ -
♦ • ♦ _ ♦ ♦ ♦ -
20%
10% —
Video Internet Phone -
0% -
co U o LU L L z O a C f N > x > N
U
LL
4/20/2016 Study conducted by Uptown Services, LLC c
. 9
ie
UPTOWN PENETRATION FORECAST
SERVICES . LLC
2 Business case projections for voice penetration reflect the quantitative research outcome and
reflect ongoing wireless ( voice ) and OTT ( video ) substitution within the residential segment . . . . '
Service Penetration
(By Year Since Launch)
45% —
40% "
35%
30% •
25% -
20%
15%
10%
5 % •
0% •
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14
Year
Phone ,Video , Internet
4/20/2016 Study conducted by Uptown Services, LLC
Packet - .
ie
UPTOWN INTERNET PENETRATION OF MUNI OVERBUILDERS
SERVICES , LLC
Internet Penetration
(By Month Since Launch)
50%
40
30%
20% •
10%
0% '
0 6 12 18 24 30 36 42 48 54 60 66 72 78 84 90 96 102 108
Month
�Sallisaw, OK Morristown , TN — Pulaski, TN Wilson, NC
Tullahoma, TN Murray, KY Bristol, VA Ft Collins Forecast
4/20/2016 Study conducted by Uptown Services, LLC 29
ie
UPTOWN VOICE PENETRATION OF MUNI OVERBUILDERS
SERVICES , LLC
Phone Penetration
(By Month Since Launch) '
30%
25 %
20%
15 %
10%
5% —
0%
0 6 12 18 24 30 36 42 48 54 60 66 72 78 84 90 96
Month
�Sallisaw Morristown — Pulaski Wilson Tullahoma, TN Bristol , VA Ft Collins Forecast
4/20/2016 Study conducted by Uptown Services, LLC
IPacket . g
ie
UPTOWN VIDEO PENETRATION OF MUNI OVERBUILDERS
SERVICES , LLC
Video Penetration
(By Month Since Launch)
60%
50% .
40% ,
Y
30%
20%
10%
0% •
0 6 12 18 24 30 36 42 48 54 60 66 72 78 84 90 96 102 108
Month
� Sallisaw, OK Morristown , TN Pulaski, TN Wilson , NC
Tullahoma, TN Jackson, TN Murray, KY Columbia , TN
Bristol , VA Ft Collins Forecast
4/20/2016 Study conducted by Uptown Services, LLC
P
UPTOWN 2013 LPC STUDY PROJECTION : INTERNET PENETRATION
SERVICES . LLC
Internet Penetration -
(By Month Since Launch)
50%
45%
40% \V1 At
IV\
35%
30% 00r7
,
25%
20%
15%
10% - •
5 %
0%
0 6 12 18 24 30 36 42 48 54 60 66 72 78 84 90 96 102 108 •
Month
�Sallisaw, OK Morristown , TN Pulaski , TN •
Wilson , NC Tullahoma , TN Clarksville, TN
Murray, KY Salisbury, NC Bristol , VA
LPC LPC - All Premises LPC - Serviceable Premises
April 16 Study conducted by Uptown Services, LLC
P
1 . 1
m
Y
L
C�
C
M
Ma
Q
D
FL
W
M
L
N
0
ML
W
Small Quantitative M
v
_ 0
Services Usage �.
N�
I.L
M
E
0
W
Y
L
CM
C
Cn
0
U
0
LL
a�
E
t�
M
a
Packet Pg . 40
ie
UPTOWN DESIGN FRAMEWORK
SERVICESALC
2 Area of Interest : Universe of • 7 , 000 small business establishments
❖ Establishments with 0 - 19 employees .
❖ Total sample size of 50 respondents
2 Respondents screened to ensure -
❖ Decision - maker for telecommunications services at the business
❖ Have Internet
❖ Located within city limits and not home - based -
❖ Respondents with immediate family members employed by any of the
following were excluded :
The City of Fort Collins •
CenturyLink -
Comcast
4/20/2016 Study conducted by Uptown Services, LLC
Packet . g
ie
UPTOWN USE OF INTERNET SERVICE
SERVICESALC
Monthly Internet Spend
2 '
Comcast and CenturyLink are the only
two ISPs with material small business 30%
market share in Fort Collins
2 20%
Stated average monthly Internet spend
�
is $ 98 per small business - — —
10
0% 7
��� ��O ADO BOO BOO OOO OOx O� .
Internet Access Provider Market Share Subscribed Download Speed
54%
34%
42 %
26 %
dm
14%
a 0 2 % 6% 8 % 8% .
2 % 2 %
e�
LP�� t 03o� �o� �o� �oo� �oo�
4/20/2016 Study conducted by Uptown Services, LLC O
. g
ie
UPTOWN USE OF VOICE SERVICE
SERVICESALC
Number of Phone Lines at the Business
(Among establishments with wireline voice) =
2 CenturyLink still maintains market share -
leadership of the small business voice 26 %
market
2
Stated spending on voice service averages
about $ 370 monthly per small business o 15 % 15 % o 13o -
13 / 13 / /
6%
Q8 : "Who is your local phone provider ?"
6% 2 % 1 2 3 4 5 6 8 +
Monthly Local Phone Spending
16% 40%
48 %
30%
28% 20%
10%
0%
CenturyLink Comcast ■ Other ��� ��o �,�� ��o <.,�� �oO�x ` 0
No Wireline Don ' t Know
4/20/2016 Study conducted by Uptown Services, LLC >
. g
ie
UPTOWN USE OF VIDEO SERVICE
SERVICES . LLC
Q2 : "For TV service, do you have.. . "
2 Only 24% of small businesses have pay TV
at their business . '
2 Stated average monthly spend is $ 71 22%
2%
76% •
Cable TV Satellite None
Monthly Pay TV Spend '
60%
50%
40%
30% •
20% — •
10%
0%
$50 $ 100 $ 150 Don 't Know
4/20/2016 Study conducted by Uptown Services, LLC
. g
ie
UPTOWN INCIDENCE OF CONTRACTS
SERVICES . LLC
2 Two -thirds of small businesses in Fort Incidence of Provider Contracts
Collins are under contract for both their . '
Internet and voice service .
26%
2 %
6%
66%
Both Internet and Voice
Internet Only
Voice Only
No Contract
4/20/2016 Study conducted by Uptown Services, LLC
Packet . g
ie
UPTOWN SATISFACTION RATINGS
SERVICES , LLC
Satisfaction Rating by Service/Service Provider
(Mean Rating on a 1 -10 Scale)
9 . 0
10 . 0
8 . 0
6 . 9 7 . 3
5 . 1 .
6 . 0
4 . 0
2 . 0
0 . 0
Pay TV Internet Voice Utilit
Satisfaction Rating by Service/Service Provider
(Percent Rating a '9' or '10')
78%
80%
60% •
40% ° 24%
20% 8%
0%
Pay TV Internet Voice Utilit
4/20/2016 Study conducted by Uptown Services, LLC
ie
UPTOWN ATTRIBUTE IMPORTANCE
SERVICES . LLC
2 While reliability and price are always important, Internet speed has dramatically increased in
importance over the last several years . Bundling and Brand are secondary in importance to
other attributes . . .
Importance Rating of Select Broadband Service Attributes
(Mean Rating on a 1 -5 Scale)
4 . 7 4 . 9 4 . 8
5 . 0 4 . 4 4 . 5 4 . 4 4 . 6 4 . 4
4 . 0 -
3 . 0
1 .8 0
2 . 0
1 . 0 -
0 . 0
Brand Customer Service Internet Speed Price Reliability
Small Business Residential
4/20/2016 Study conducted by Uptown Services, LLC
. g
ie
UPTOWN IMPORTANCE OF DOWNLOAD VS . UPLOAD
SERVICESALC
z
Question 25 : "What aspect of Internet speed is most important ? "
Importance of Internet Speed on Download vs . Upload
76 % =
59 % .
37 % ;
16 %
1 %
Download Most Important Upload Most Important Both Important
Small Business Residential
4/20/2016 Study conducted by Uptown Services, LLC _
Packet . g
ie
UPTOWN CUSTOMER NEEDS .
SERVICES . LLC
z Lower prices and increased Internet speed dominate the wish list for services improvement as Internet speed has gained importance . . .
Q23/320 "What would you like to see most improved from your current
broadband services ?"
37 %
Lower Prices 32 % -
Increased Internet Speed 34%34%
Reliability 34 / 48
10 %
Nothing 10 % Residential
10 % Small Business
Customer Service 10 %
Channel Selection
4% -
Bundling Service 1 %
4/20/2016 Study conducted by Uptown Services, LLC
ie
UPTOWN DESIRED DOWNLOAD SPEED
SERVICES . LLC
2 Comcast and CenturyLink are the only two ISPs with material small business market share in
Fort Collins
Q24 : "What level of Internet download speed would you want if the following
were available to your place of business ? "
36 %
26% -
18%
12%
6% -
2 %Ai
Same As Have 20M 50M 100M 1G Don 't Know
Now
4/20/2016 Study conducted by Uptown Services, LLC
. •
kAk�—
UPTOWN PURCHASE INTENT
SERVICES , LLC
2 88 % of small businesses indicated they would definitely or probably switch to =
the FTTP system for Internet service . . .
Q19 - 21 : "How likely would you be to subscribe to [ insert service ] if it were 10 °0 less
than Comcast or CenturyLink charges ?
100%
75%
50%
25%
0%
Internet Phone Video
■ Definitely 44% 38% 12%
Probably 44% 44% 14%
Might/ Might Not 10% 12 % 16%
■ Probably Not 2 % 6% 10%
Definitely Not 46%
■ Don 't Know 2 %
4/20/2016 Study conducted by Uptown Services, LLC acket Pg . 5!11
1 . 1
ie PENETRATION CALCULATIONS
UPTOWN
SERVICISALC
f�
Q
D
_
f�
FL
a�
�a
L
co
Residential _
M
(Terminal Year 5 Eroded ) (Terminal Year 7 Eroded ) ,d 0
0
ML
W
Video 24 . 6 % / 20 . 9 % ( Year 5 ) 14 . 2 % / 11 . 2 ( Year 7 )
M
Internet 38 . 8 % 45 . 0 %
Telephone 28 . 6% / 14 . 3 % 41 . 0%
Ed
Diffusion % ( Yearsl - 7 ) 0 / 45 / 75 / 90 / 100 / 100 / 100 0 / 25 / 50 / 70 / 80 / 90 / 100
J y
_
Q
U
0
um
_
a�
E
t�
4/20/2016 Study conducted by
ca
a
Uptown - -
Packet Pg . 52
ie
UPTOWN PROVIDER PREFERENCE
SERVICES . LLC
2 The majority of respondents, when given the choice, would prefer to receive high speed
Internet from the City . . .
Q28 : 'Among the following list of potential providers, who would you prefer to
receive high -speed Internet service from ? "
Small Business Residential
45 %
36% =
24% 2413
15 %
11 %
6% 2 % 4% 4% 2 % 3 % -
0% 0% 0 % 20� 0 %
CP
�, Pam° O
4/20/2016 Study conducted by Uptown Services, LLC
Packet - .
ie
UPTOWN PENETRATION FORECAST
SERVICESALC
Service Penetration
(By Year Since Launch)
50%
45%
F ,
40%
35%
30% //000
25% -
20%
15%
10%
5 % •
0% •
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15
Year
Phone ,Video , Internet
4/20/2016 Study conducted by Uptown Services, LLC
1 . 1
m
Y
L
C�
C
M
ma
Q
D
FL
W
M
L
N
O
ML
Large Business Institutions
W
M
O
Q
O
w
ma
C
M
E
O
0
d
Y
L
M
2
Cn
O
U
O
LL
W
E
t�
ca
Q
Packet Pg . 55
kAk�_
UPTOWN COMMERCIAL BROADBAND SERVICES MARKET
SERVICES , LLC
Metro Ethernet Dedicated Internet
Internet Access (Transport ) (Access )
Small Businesses and
Market Segment Medium/ Large Medium to Large Business and Institutions :
depending on sector
Network Last Mile Last Mile
Architecture ( Copper, Coax, or or
Fiber ) Middle Mile ( Fiber lateral to ring )
Majority of
Potential Market connections Typically less than 100 connections per urban
Size market
( 90% of all premises )
Connection Type
Shared bandwidth Dedicated Private Dedicated bandwidth
( GPON ) Circuit ( s ) or MAN ( ActiveQ
Point -to- point Dedicated access
Typical Data Standard Internet tiers transport from 100M bandwidth from 100M
Service Set up to 1G
L�. to 10G + to 10G +
April 16 49
Packet . g
ie
UPTOWN HIGH CAPACITY COMMERCIAL MARKET NEEDS
SERVICES . LLC
2 Typical High Capacity Needs and Desired Service Attributes '
2 Infrastructure Availability : Fiber is the Standard
2 Dedicated Capacity : Superior to shared bandwidth connections
2 Competitive Pricing
2 Service Experience : Reliability, Customer Service , and Responsiveness
2 Network Integration : Select firms require national /global tier 1 provider
2 High Capacity Providers in Fort Collins
2 Infrastructure & Bandwidth : FRII , Comcast, CenturyLink, Level3 , PRPA
2
Bandwidth : FRII , Comcast, CenturyLink, Level3 , PRPA, AT&T, Integra
April 16 Study conducted by Uptown Services, LLC
ie
UPTOWN RESEARCH APPROACH
SERVICES . LLC
2 Qualitative assessment of large business market in Ft . Collins '
2 24 Depth Interviews of 30 -40 minutes
2 Responses aggregated for confidentiality =
2 Identify key market characteristics
2 Fiber availability, capacity needs , performance criteria .
2 Current price levels, use of contracts , and connection requirements
2 Estimate potential market share
2 Satisfaction and switching criteria
2 Openness to City- provided fiber services
April 16 Study conducted by Uptown Services, LLC
kAk�_
UPTOWN DEPTH INTERVIEW PARTICIPANTS
SERVICES , LLC
Health Care Services Retail Goods
❖ Univ. of Colorado Health Press One Customer Care New Belgium Brewery
❖ Exponential Engineering Odell Brewing Co .
❖ Neenan Archistruction
❖ Brinkman Construction
Technology Education /Government Manufacturing
❖ Riverside Technology ❖ Poudre School District ❖ Rodelle
❖ Numerica ❖ Poudre River Library ❖ Tolmar
❖ Wolf Robotics District ❖ Forney Industries
❖ Woodward Inc . ❖ Colorado State Univ. In - Situ
❖ Technigraphics ( CACI ) _04<6L
❖ Air Resource Specialist Other Retail Service Provider
❖ Broadcom .;. Fort Collins Chamber of VO FRII '
❖ CSI Web Commerce •
April 16 Study conducted by Uptown Services, LLC '
. g
ie
UPTOWN NATIONAL DEPLOYMENT OF COMMERCIAL FIBER
SIRVIC IS . LLC
Nationally, aggressive rollouts of fiber by incumbent and alternative providers have substantially -
increased the availability of fiber to commercial buildings . . .
" The majority of new fiber deployments were focused on connecting medium and smaller buildings in
the metro areas surrounding major cities across the U . S . Broader accessibility to on - net fiber has started
to shake up the services markets ." - Rosemary Cochran , principal at Vertical Systems Group =
Percentage of Commercial Buildings Served by Fiber
( Total U. S. Buildings with 20+ Employees)
39 % 43
32 %
28%
19 %
11 %
2004 2008 2010 2011 2013 2014
Source: Vertical Systems Group, April 2015
April 16 Study conducted by Uptown Services, LLC
Packet . • 60
kAk�—
UPTOWN NEEDS ARE BEING MET
SERVIC ES . LLC
Due to multiple incumbent providers competing for the commercial segment, fiber
has been deployed to most business locations and is heavily utilized . Advanced data
needs are being met, but businesses will consider the City as a provider option . . .
Fiber Available ? 19 1
Have Fiber ? 17 3
Dedicated Connection ? 8
Have Redundancy ? 5 Ye
No =
Have Unmet Needs ? 19
Under Contract ? 3
Will Consider the City ? ;7 1
0% 20% 40 % 60% 80 % 100 %
April 16 Study conducted by Uptown Services, LLC
Pg , 61
kAk�—
UPTOWN SATISFACTION SCORES .
SERVICES , LLC
Satisfaction levels are moderate and higher for alternative providers
i Average satisfaction is 3 . 7 in Fort Collins Reasonably Satisfied -
i Average satisfaction in Pasadena is 3 . 4 Reliability
•Four providers were rated by 3 or more firms Technical KnowledgeAreas for Improvement
Satisfaction Rating by Service/Service Provider Proactive Service
(Mean Rating on a 1 -5 Scale) Local Staffing/Support
Leve13 4 . 3 "
FRI I 4 . 0
Comcast 3 . 9 -
Primary Providers
CenturyLink 3 . 2
in For Collins •
PRPA 5 . 0
City of Ft Collins 5 ,
AT&T 3 . 5
Integra 3 . 0 = Less than 3 responses
1 . 0 1 . 5 2 . 0 2 . 5 3 . 0 3 . 5 4 . 0 4 . 5
April 16 Study conducted by Uptown Services, LLC
Pg , 62
ie
UPTOWN SERVICE PROVIDER SELECTION CRITERIA
SERVICES . LLC
Among selection factors , reliability and cost rank highest, likely a result of the
commoditization of high cap services . . . . '
Broadband Provider Selection Criteria Importance
(Mean Rating on a 1 -5 Scale)
• ,
5 . 0
402 4 . 3 4 . 3
4. 0 3 . 8 3 . 8
3 . 0
2 . 6
2 . 4
10
Brand VAS Local Support Technological Redundancy Customer Cost Reliability
Superiority Service
April 16 Study conducted by Uptown Services, LLC
P .
kAk�—
UPTOWN HIGH CAP PRICING
SERVICES , LLC
Price levels in Fort Collins benchmark as high for capacities below 200M but are
more competitive at higher capacities . Average spending per connection is $ 1 , 575
per month . . .
$ 120
$ 100
100 $ 100 =
-
$80 = Fort Collins Dedicated Access
$63 $ 63 Fort Collins Shared Access =
$ 60 Pasadena
$46 $43 Typical Municipal
$40 $35 $36
$ 25
$ 20 $ 2 $ 15 $ 1 $ 19 $ 20
g $ 10
$3
$ 0
o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 � O O O M M O O O O O 0 0 0
r-1 r-1 r-I r-1 r-I r-1 r-I r-I N N N N N M M Ln I *� O O O O
r-1 r1 r-1 r1
Source: Fort Collins Depth Interviews among 23 commercial institutions (2016) and Pasadena Depth Interviews among 19 commercial institutions (2014).
April 16 Study conducted by Uptown Services, LLC
. g
ie
UPTOWN LARGE BUSINESS VOICE SERVICE
SERVICES . LLC
Large businesses in Fort Collins are moving away from traditional voice circuits and
onto VoIP platforms that move traffic onto the firm 's data connection .
2
Average cost per analog line ( 1F13 ) : $ 50 per month
2 Average cost per PRI circuit ( 1FB ) : $ 400 - $ 500 per month
Voice Solution Type
( % of Respondents )
11 %
28 % 1FBs
PRI
11 % 500 ° Hosted PBX
VolP over Data
4/20/2016 Study conducted by Uptown Services, LLC
Packet ' • 65
ie
UPTOWN PERCEIVED MOTIVATION FOR FTTP
SERVICES . LLC
Percentage of Respondents by Motivation Choice
( Closed Ended with 3 Options )
62 %
33 % -
5 %
City Revenue New Tech . and Provide Better
Diversification Econ . Service
Development
4/20/2016 Study conducted by Uptown Services, LLC
Packet . • 66
ie
UPTOWN LARGE BUSINESS SEGMENT FINDINGS
SERVICES . LLC
Research Findings :
2 Fiber is widely available and there is a high incidence of dedicated access via fiber
2 Most firms have sufficient bandwidth currently, but some would upgrade if cost effective
2 Telecom and broadband needs are being met, but firms are open to considering the City =
network for a data connection . Lower price is a key switching factor for these firms
2 Some firms will wait to evaluate the track record of the FTTP system
Pro Forma :
2 Estimate the dedicated access market as 5 % of the all commercial entities ( • 400 ) with
penetration growing to 20% by Year 8 .
2 High incidence of dedicated access, but competitive . Estimate ARPU at $ 1, 500 per
connection to reflect • 30 % discount ( at tiers of 500M + )
2 Voice services can be delivered via PRI , analog lines, and hosted PBX solutions, but
migration to VolP over the data connection will limit long term revenue potential .
April 16 Study conducted by Uptown Services, LLC
' • 67
ie
UPTOWN TASK 3 FINDINGS
SERVICES . LLC
2 The two incumbents have the vast majority of market share for both Internet and
voice services in Fort Collins
2 Satisfaction for Internet and voice service benchmarks low. Video is average .
2 Top market needs are :
2 Mass Market : Lower prices, increased Internet speed , and improved reliability
2 Complex Market : Lower prices and carrier-grade reliability
2 Mass market purchase intent is very high and exceeds Longmont survey metrics '
2 Complex market needs are being met, but price levels are high up to 200M =
2 Strong provider preference for the City within the mass market . The complex market
is open to considering the City FTTP network as a provider option .
2 The project appeal and purchase intent is strongest among younger households
April 16
. •
ATTACHMENT
n
FCity of �PTow ,
ort Collins _
� "s. . �. �r�� � � • _ - ,.. :,try... _�.�� r�-•�!'�#- � :� �YA�^�� st_ _
Cu
CIO
?) tqmCu
- '* +
•
SON; IUUL; Cu
AWL
•
CL
Broadband Market Demand Study — City of Fort Collins -
Study Conducted by Uptown Services , LLC
CIO
Packet
. g
1 . 2
_
�a
E
m
City of
0
, Fort Collins Y L
/ • Timeline
Formation of Council Work Council Work Council D
Expert Review Session 4/26 Session 8/23 Recommendation Sessionrm
AR 7a
' MAYAUGOCTNOV ai
a�
�a
L
Citizen Ad-Hoc I i +'
_
Asset Report
fC
0
Broadband ! StandardsMarket m
o�
Demand Surveys
v
Feasibility
_
0
SWOT
i +
_
Revised U)
a�
Expert Review Broadband Recommendation RecI 1 . 1 Q
_
'o
Community • . ' Q
L
3
0
a
m
E
la
a
Packet Pg . 70
1 . 2
_
�a
E
m
City of
0
, Fort Collins U
ccL
CU
Q
D
• 400 respondents
a
U
• Statistically valid phone survey
• Asked opinions on broadband , CU
voice and video
m
M
O
L
Q
.O
L
O
a
m
E
Ca
a
Packet Pg . 71
1 . 2
_
�a
E
m
City of
0
, Fort CollinsNow CU
Internet Service
Y
sL
Q
4 � zoo Internet Market Share rm
Cable Modem and DSL have the vast (Households)
majority of market share at 94 %
L
Cn
_
CU
' I n
M
0
ML
W
M
v
_
57%
_
a�
m
L
Q
_.O
Q
Dial Up Cable Modem ■ DSL Satellite Other 3
0
a
m
E
Ca
a
Packet Pg . 72
1 .2
MO
E
m
City of
art Collins
SatisfactionRatings
CL
■ Ft Collins ■ Longmont Satisfaction Rating by Service/Service Provider D
(Mean Rating on a 1 -10 Scale)
a
10 . 0 8 . 7 8 . 6
7 . 7 7 . 2 N
7 . 0
Ow
8 . 0 6 . 7 6 . 7 7 ' S 6 • 8 6 . 6 6 . 6 7 . 5 �
5 . 6 5 . 7 L
6 . 0 Cn
4 . 0 MO
�a
2 . 0 -a
0 . 0 °
m
Cable TV Satellite TV Non - Pay TV DSL Cable Modem Telephone Utility • •
rn
v
M
80% Percent Rating a 19' or ' 10' °
64% 65 /o a
60%
36% 41%
40% 31 % 29% 31 % a,
23 % 20% 12 / 23 % 15 % 19% 23 % Q
20% °
0% °a
Cable TV Satellite TV Non - Pay TV DSL Cable Modem Telephone Utility 3
0
a
Im
E
u
�a
a
Packet Pg . 73
1 . 2
_
�a
E
m
City of
0
, Fort Collins U
4W • . -
CU
The chart below compares the results of this study with 24 markets where - •
Uptown has completed similar quantitative research : - • •
a
• • U
Satisfaction Rating by Service/Service Provider • - • •
L
(Mean Rating on a 1 to 10 Scale) • - • • Cn
9
8 °
m
7 - - - • .
v
i _ •_ 0
I
6 - - - -
5 -
'o
Cable TV Satellite TV DSL Cable Modem Telephone Utility • • - • •
3
0
a
m
E
Ca
a
Packet Pg . 74
1 .2
Ma
_
E
m
City of
art Collins low
Residential• Customer Needs C
1
C
7
QUESTION : _
"What would you like to see most improved from your current broadband servicesT' a
Lower Prices 37 ° 49%o N
34% a
Increased Internet Speed 29%
34% o
Reliability 16% 00
rn
Nothing 109/0
15%
10% 0
Customer Service 9% c
a�
4% ■ Fort Collins
Channel Selection Q
6%
■ Longmont o
Bundling Service 1% a
a�
3
0
a
IM
E
M
U
�a
a
Packet Pg . 75
1 . 2
_
�a
E
m
City of
0
, Fort Collins U
Electric Bill Surcharge
CU
QUESTION : _
cu
"Would you support adding a $ 5 monthly fee to your electric bill to partially fund the a
construction and operation of this network for the first 24 months of operation ?"
L
Cn
CU
I would support 57%
43 % M
0
ML
W
would be neutral 21 % M
35 %
0
�a
_
I would not support 22 %°
22 /0 ■ Fort Collins
_
Longmont Q
L
3
0
a
m
E
Ca
a
Packet Pg . 76
1 . 2
c
�a
E
m
City of
0
, Fort Collins U
Purchase Intent
cL
1
Question : a
"A fiber optic network could provide high -speed internet service to your household . How likely would you be M
to subscribe to internet if it were 10 % less than Comcast or CenturyLink charges ? a
a�
INTERNET
1 % 1 ' � � 1 ' � a
OTHER RESPONSE� " PROBABLY WOULD') " DEFINITELY WOULD"
L
Purchase Intent by Internet Connection 0°
'Definitely Would' at 10% Discount) ■ Cable Modem
v
DSL =
0
■ Satellite J
c
i N
m
- Q
L
Definitely Would o
a
m
E
Ca
a
Packet Pg . 77
1 .2
Ma
E
m
City of
art Collins NNW
Provider Preference
QUESTION : c
"Among the following list of potential providers, ■ Fort Collins a
who would you prefer to receive high -speed Internet service from ? " ■ Longmont
L
Cn
Ma
52 % M
45 % o
ML
W
M
23 %
19% _
° 15 % 12%
11 /° 9% 84%
4% 3 %
i
Q
CenturyLink Comcast The City FRII A new provider Don ' t Know Q
i
N
3
0
a
IM
E
M
U
�a
a
Packet Pg . 78
1 . 2
_
�a
E
m
City of
0
, Fort Collins For
Take Rate Potential Subscribers
_
RESIDENTIAL
a
a�
LONGMONT
FORT COLLINSCn
_
Ca
Internet 38 . 8 % 36 . 4 %
0
ML
W
M
v
_
0
_
L
Q
_
Note : At just over one year since launch , Longmont NextLight has an actual subscribership of 40 -45 % , Q
most likely due to their Charter Membership Pricing 3
0
a
m
E
Ca
a
Packet Pg . 79
1 . 2
_
�a
E
m
City of
0
, Fort CollinsOWN CU
Internet Market Share Impact
Y
m
ca
a
Current Internet Market Share Internet Market Share Post Fiber System D
(Households) (Households) a
U
49/c 2 % 2 % 2 %
�a
L
_
CU
0
39%
rn
M
v
_
0
57% _
a�
33% L
a
_
'o
CL
Fiber Cable Modem ■ DSL Satellite Other 3
0
a
m
E
Ca
a
Packet Pg . 80
1 . 2
_
�a
E
m
City of
0
, Fort Collins Cu L
1
Cu
D
_
• Establishments with a.
0 - 19 employees
Cn
• Total sample size of Cu
cu
50 respondents
• Responses came back
similar to residential
_
L
Q
L
O
a
m
E
Cu
a
Packet Pg . 81
1 . 2
_
�a
E
m
City of
0
, Fort Collins U
Customer Needs
cL
CU
Q
D
QUESTION :
"What would you like to see most improved from your current broadband services ?" a
32 X
Lower Prices
37% Cn
— 34%
Increased Internet Speed 34%
�a
Reliability 34o 48 % m
/
rn
a
Nothing 10 %
10%
_
10% 0
Customer Service a
10% c
a�
Small Business L
Channel Selection 4%
Residential =
Bundling Service 1 % CL
a�
3
0
a
m
E
�a
a
Packet Pg . 82
1 . 2
_
�a
E
m
City of
0
, Fort Collinslow
Large Business Interviews
Y
sL
CU
Q
HEALTH CARE SERVICES RETAIL GOODS =
• Univ. of Colorado Health Press One Customer Care New Belgium Brewery
• Exponential Engineering •
Odell Brewing Co .
TECHNOLOGY Neenan Archistruction Cn
73
• Riverside Technology Brinkman Construction MANUFACTURING r.
• Numerica Rodelle M
• EDUCATION /GOVERNMENT °
Wolf Robotics Tolmar 0°
• Woodward Inc . Poudre School District Forney Industries M
• Technigraphics ( CACI ) Poudre River Library In - Situ =
• Air Resource Specialist District o
• Broadcom Colorado State Univ. OTHER
• CSI Web RETAIL SERVICE PROVIDER Fort Collins Chamber of
_
• FRII Commerce Q
Study conducted by Uptown Services , LLC
3
0
a
m
E
�a
a
Packet Pg . 83
1 . 2
_
�a
E
m
City of
0
, Fort Collins U
Needs Are Being Met
SL
CU
Q
D
Fiber Available
a
U
Have Fiber
L
Cn
Dedicated Connection =
Yes
Have Redundancy 0°
■ N o
M
Have Unmet Needs
0
Under Contract N
L
Q
Will Consider the City o
L
3
0
a
m
E
Ca
a
Packet Pg . 84
1 . 2
_
ca
E
m
City of
0
, Fort CollinsNow
Internet Value
Y
sL
CU
Q
Minimum Price ( in USD ) Per Mbps Download
United States $ 0 . 59 as Published by the OECD, September 2014 a
U
L
Cn
Fort Collins DSL $ 1 . 85 CU
0
ML
W
Fort Collins Cable $ 0 . 60
Modem
0
ca
_
a�
Longmont L
NextLight $ 0 . 05 Q
_
'o
CL
L
$ $ 0 . 20 $0 .40 $ 0 . 60 $0 . 80 $ 1 . 00 $1. 20 $ 1 .40 $ 1 . 60 $ 1 . 80 $ 2 . 00 3
0
a
m
E
ca
a
Packet Pg . 85
1 . 2
_
a
E
m
City of
0
, Fort CollinsPON c Oto U i izen Ad � Hoc Committee
m
ca
Eighteen citizens representing a variety of geography, skill and
user level , and overall broadband interest . ,
L
This group has been engaged to : CU
WO
• Review and discuss materials provided by City staff and Uptown Services o
m
• Help staff design communications for the broader public
M
• Be a liaison to the public regarding current process , engagement opportunities ,
and to share questions
_
L
Q
Staff anticipates convening the group meeting about every six weeks =
Q
throughout 2016 . o
a
m
E
Ca
a
Packet Pg . 86
1 . 2
_
a
E
m
City of
0
Fort Collins Review
Y L
CU
Expert Panel
la
Q
Purpose of the Expert Review Panel :
a
• Provide independent , expert technical review during the development of the
broadband plan so that critical questions are posed and assessed .
Cn
• Review and discuss documents by City staff and Uptown Services to ensure
that the project ' s feasibility, sufficiency in information collected , and 0
0
communication needs are being addressed . Go
M
v
_
Time Commitment — at least three times in 2016
_
1st meeting — May 2 , 2016
_.o
L
3
0
a
m
E
Ca
a
Packet Pg . 87
1 . 2
_
a
E
m
City of
0
Fort Collins Review
Y L
CU
Expert Panelists
la
Lev Gonick
_
• Chief Executive Officer, OneCommunity a
• Founding member, GigU
L
Rob Houlihan
CU
• Chief Technology Officer, Cedar Falls Utilities
Ma
Blair Levin
• Senior Fellow at Brookings Institute M
• Served as Executive Director of the Federal Communications Commission ' s 2009 National Broadband
Plan , and as Chief of Staff for the FCC 1993 - 1997
Deb Socia
L
• Executive Director, Next Century Cities
_
'o
L
3
0
a
_
m
E
ca
a
Packet Pg . 88
1 . 2
_
�a
E
m
City of
0
, Fort Collins Y L
/ • Timeline
Formation of Council Work Council Work Council D
Expert Review Session 4/26 Session 8/23 Recommendation Sessionrm
AR 7a
' MAYAUGOCTNOV ai
a�
�a
L
Citizen Ad-Hoc I i +'
_
Asset Report
fC
0
Broadband ! StandardsMarket m
o�
Demand Surveys
v
Feasibility
_
0
SWOT
i +
_
Revised U)
a�
Expert Review Broadband Recommendation RecI 1 . 1 Q
_
'o
Community • . ' Q
L
3
0
a
m
E
la
a
Packet Pg . 89
1 . 2
c
�a
E
m
City of
0
, Fort Collins U Questions ?
CU
a
U
or ai
a�
�a
L
CU
0
ML
W
v
0
N
L
Q
.O
Q
L
3
0
a
m
E
Ca
a
Packet Pg . 90
DATE : April 26 , 2016
STAFF : Cameron Gloss , Planning Manager WORK SESSION ITEM
City Council
SUBJECT FOR DISCUSSION
Mountain Vista Area Open Lands Preservation Scenario .
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
The purpose of this item is to evaluate an open land preservation scenario for the Mountain Vista area that
maintains the area ' s overall projected jobs and housing , but configures future development patterns to conserve
more land for local food production , access to nature , and innovative housing opportunities .
GENERAL DIRECTION SOUGHT AND SPECIFIC QUESTIONS TO BE ANSWERED
What is the best way to implement the Mountain Vista Open Lands Preservation vision ?
BACKGROUND / DISCUSSION
At the June 9 , 2015 Work Session , where staff presented the pros and cons of reducing housing and employment
intensity within the Mountain Vista area through an alternative " Rural Scenario" , City Council requested a second
phase of analysis , including outreach to Mountain Vista property owners and the public , to determine a revised
possible future vision . Council specifically requested that the second phase address the following issues :
• Application of new policy initiatives such as Nature in the City, Urban Agriculture and the Housing Affordability
Policy Study that have occurred since the Mountain Vista Subarea Plan was adopted ;
• Partnership opportunities among property owners and with the City to provide infrastructure improvements ;
and
• Promote innovative community design principles that represent best practices in housing design ,
neighborhood livability, and the integration of agriculture and natural systems .
Public outreach was conducted with this second phase of the assessment primarily through a multi-day design
charrette (see Attachment 1 for the Charrette Summary) . The charrette identified opportunities and constraints
for the area , project goals and how to meet them at the regional , community and neighborhood scales . Two
major framework plans were generated : "Access to Nature" , and " Living Corridor" . It was the latter framework that
garnered the most support from charrette participants and that was carried forward with a more detailed
illustrative plan that expanded on major design concepts (Attachment 2 ) .
Overall , the land use concept connects agriculture , parks , open space , and wildlife habitat through a large green
swath of open lands running parallel along the No . 8 Ditch and near existing and planned regional stormwater
detention areas . The concept provides for water detention/filtration while maintaining food production in proximity
to clustered housing , offices , shops , parks , schools , and light industrial uses . Because the multi -use corridor is
centrally located within Mountain Vista , the trail and open space network links the area to local food production ,
such as greenhouses , a community kitchen and farmer' s market.
The design exercise was intended to provide a framework that will aid in creating an urban agricultural landscape
that promotes ecological biodiversity, access to nature for residents , and open land systems integration , i . e . ,
stormwater detention , parks , community agriculture , or natural areas within shared or abutting spaces .
Packet Pg . 91
April 26 , 2016 Page 2
Agricultural concepts shown do not rely on traditional agricultural practices that cover a large land area , but on
more intensive methods such as :
• Small farms of less than 5 acres
• Mini or micro farming on 1 acre or less
community gardens
• backyard farming
• edible landscaping
greenhouse farming
Creating networks of greenways that spur off of the primary open space framework creates networks for informal
recreation , exercise and enjoyment of nature , in addition to the opportunity for small -scale agriculture . In between
these "fingers" of open space are clustered residential neighborhoods and employment areas that connect and
provide a unifying element between a rural and urban landscape .
Next Steps
In high land value communities like Fort Collins that have intense development pressures (as opposed to low land
value communities like Detroit and Cleveland ) , urban agriculture and natural habitat needs to be more creatively
integrated into the landscape . Case studies of similar communities have shown that publicly-held land such as
stormwater detention areas , parks , schools and privately-held land needs to be integrated in order to provide a
diversity of urban agriculture types at different scales .
The City amended its supplementary regulations of the Land Use Code in 2013 to allow for a range of urban
agricultural activities at a level and intensity that is compatible with the City' s residential neighborhoods and non -
residential areas ; however, these Code changes alone may not result in the open lands preservation scenario
depicted . Staff is considering that the following implementation measures for Mountain Vista that would also be
applicable to other developing areas of the community:
• Analysis - more thorough review of existing LUC standards
• Integration of Capital Improvements related to stormwater and parks
• Revisit street standard designs to promote rural character
• Design Guidelines based on best practices for innovative housing , urban agriculture and habitat preservation
• Partnerships ( public agencies , private developers , CSAs)
ATTACHMENTS
1 . Mountain Vista Charrette Summary: Cultivating Community ( PDF )
2 . Mountain Vista Open Lands Preservation Illustrative Plan ( PDF )
3 . Work Session Summary, June 9 , 2015 ( PDF )
4 . PowerPoint Presentation ( PDF )
Packet Pg . 92
ATTACHMENT 1 2 ' 1
0
•L
V
Mountain Vista Subarea
0
Urban Agriculture Charrette Outcomes : N
L
a
Cultivating Community
J
C
W
Q
0
M
d
C
7
X=
00
O M
V EC
ati
o
U
c
<a
February 2015
A summary of findings in stakeholder interviews, in - house charrettes, and public involvement
events exploring the possibilities for the integration of urban agricultural elements in the
Mountain Vista Subarea Plan prepared for the City of Fort Collins by Logan Simpson
c
0
a�
E
M
a
Packet Pg . 93
2 . 1
O
Introduction
The Mountain Vista Subarea is the final frontier in northeast Fort Collins, encompassing Cn
more than 3 , 000 acres bordered by Richards Lake Road to the north, Interstate 25 to the o
P
east, Vine Drive to the south, and Turnberry Road and Lemay Avenue to the west.
Historically agricultural in use, much of the subarea remains undeveloped, with the
exception of five residential neighborhoods and the Anheuser- Busch InBev (ABI) brewery. a
In November 2015 , the City conducted a 2 - day workshop with City staff and two public J
meetings to explore alternative development scenarios for this area, considering existing
City plans, allowable development under the current zoning code, case studies from other p
communities, and interviews with area stakeholders . This document summarizes related
plans, allowable development under the current zoning code, case studies from other
communities, and interviews with area stakeholders . The purpose of the study was to :
• Apply Nature in the City goals, Urban Agriculture regulations, and the Housing
Affordability Policy Study that have occurred since the Mountain Vista Subarea Plan c
was adopted.
00
• Identify partnership opportunities among property owners and the City to provide M
needed transportation, storm drainage, and other public infrastructure
improvements .
• Consider innovative community design principles that represent best practices in E
housing design, neighborhood livability, and the integration of agriculture and v
natural systems . _
• Ensure the alignment of any new agricultural or horticultural design and cc
development initiatives with zoning regulation and stay within the definition of
Urban Agriculture . v
L
cu
E
E
co
a�
a�
L
L
(U
N
_
_
7
O
_
d
E
t
U
MOUNTAIN VISTA4r— m
Packet Pg . 94
2 . 1
Background o
i
Development of Mountain Vista is guided by a number of existing plans and regulations .
U
Cn
Mountain Vista Subarea Plan, 2009 a
The Mountain Vista Subarea Plan, originally adopted in March 1999, and subsequently
updated in September 2009, provides a community development framework for the area, N
including a future land use plan and new road alignments shown on the following page. It is a
important that any new design ideas balance residential, employment, commercial, civic,
and open lands uses, including recreation facilities, parks, trails, and natural areas, in
_
conjunction with the current goals and vision set for the subarea, which states : a
0
" Mountain Vista is intended to be an integral part of Fort Collins, functioning as an
L
extension of the greater community. This subarea will be known for its impressive views of Q
the mountains and recognized for its successful and innovative community design . This y
subarea will be distinct and attractive with a comfortable, town -like atmosphere that c
residents and businesses identify with and take pride in. Neighborhoods, industrial uses,
open space, natural areas, agriculture, parks, schools, a shopping district and business C
2
centers within this subarea will be connected and served by multi- modal connections 00
including vehicle, transit, bicycle, and pedestrian modes . Key components of the area will V)
be the integration of new housing types, agriculture and open spaces into future
development. "
E
City Plan, 2011 0
City Plan, the Comprehensive Plan for Fort Collins, was last updated in 2011 and includes a,
several relevant goals for the subarea, including maintaining a rural and agricultural edge
to the community and supporting local and regional food production, while protecting Y
riparian areas and open space to sustain watersheds, wildlife habitat, and natural areas . v
L
Urban Agriculture, 2013 E
Since 2013 , the City has adopted a number of regulations related to urban agriculture in an y
effort to implement four City Plan goals related to local food production . The City' s Land
Use Code now allows urban agriculture in all zone districts and farmers markets in more L
zone districts than before . The City Code' s animal husbandry policies are also more v
permissible, including basing the number of chickens per property on the lot size, allowing
N
ducks and goats, and updated beekeeping practices . >
_
Nature in the City Strategic Plan, 2015
Adopted in March 2015 , the Nature in the City program envisions " a connected open space
network accessible to the entire community that provides a variety of experiences and
functional habitat for people, plants, and wildlife . " The plan seeks to ensure every resident E
is within a 10 - minute walk to nature from their home or workplace. U
Q
Packet Pg . 95
2 . 1
I ' `• v
u
�' La *wU U yzoe
,
'1 `z State Land m
Board (City (L
Conservation
\ - - � •- •- •- •� � Easement) C
, �• ` N•M/ Edor � �
"Ito� S•LM.■m ..r�I Q
i L�
I tal • � � � C
1 1 O
S,.—•/ \ •` .. a pr
00
Silt • '`'� 1••A J• r
`� � • • I�roRLm
t■ , M
1 �
a% I TWO
IF
■ \ ` 1
J
i . / ■ .�
• . . � � �JaLJa1Ja1�aY •uti �.. �. �.Iaf(LLLLLL� _ p'
1
1 1 / UOPa
tc
00110110
� — — • t 1 1
1
L
i • U
M
M y is +'
�.. �twam rrr INtch ! ( :ity limits •[Iran%itir•n l �.atriCt A >
I �kc Land Use law,• Iknstq• \Iivcd UscNcighbl •rNxKI c
✓J� �urrmaatar ulluum ( :• ,m n nuul \ladturr Density NGxtd l •.1 Ntighluorh/ ■KI
( ;, ,n Iktcntn .n
de, hutun Rua,1x I ?mrknmint Park p
- IrEllustnal Site
SStt' ( )d & Gas Nuffcr �
tome ( hl & ( ia.+ Buffer tt
�a
MOUNTAIN VISTA
a
Packet Pg . 96
2 . 1
Existing Conditions .0
ma"ft4ai.« bj Mm .. - - M
U
La..d Ow+�t�i4u p Ewi stu+y Agru ul fu raL Usty Topogra y Cl)
I C
'iill 1�- p \ N
C �F� .� J
-
_ . ,
Q
O
d
L
N
C
O
Land Ownership
00
A few major landowners control the majority of the subarea, the largest of which is V)
M
Anheuser- Busch InBev (ABI ) with 986 acres of land in the northeast section of the subarea.
The Poudre R- 1 School District owns several acres on the west side of the subarea that
could be developed into a school campus, depending on educational needs in the area. E
E
Existing Land Uses c°�
The Anheuser- Busch Brewery occupies the northeast portion of the subarea, though much =
of its property remains farmland. Approximately 1,490 acres, or 48 % of the subarea, is >
currently used as agriculture . Several areas have already been converted to residential
developments . These include Maple Hill Subdivision, Storybrook Subdivision, Waterfield v
Subdivision, Trailhead Subdivision, and Waterglen Subdivision. L
E
Topography & Drainage ;
co
There is very little slope within the subarea. The west side drains into Richard' s Lake, Long
Pond, and Lindenmaier Lake . The south and east sides of the subarea drain south into the L
Upper Cooper Slough and to the east side of I - 2S . Current or planned detention areas are
shown with a hatch in each of the maps, above. v
N
Oil & Gas Wells >
The oil and gas buffer shown in each of the maps is illustrated at 3S0 ' and 1000 ' . The Code
prohibits development within 3SO ' of a drilled and capped oil or gas well and requires
notification for development within the 1000 ' buffer.
a�
E
U
4 MOUNTAIN VISTA
Packet Pg . 97
2 . 1
Future Conditions 10
When the Mountain Vista Subarea is
entirely developed, it will include ...... - N
approximately 26, 618 employees and } c
9, 539 households, based on existing °°`""' ""` "
zoning. To accommodate future - K•- N
development, several roadway
DrY• vd '.wY+
improvements and additions will be M"se "-`
needed, as shown on the map on page 3 . oil,
Within the initial plans for the subarea, a
a sketch was created for the mixed-use L
commercial center to illustrate scale,
anticipated uses, parking, and
viewsheds, as shown at right and ■ %=- _
below.
■ —� O
00
c`')
7
E
E
O
- - U
Ira
sir r— 1,4
40
R �' �► �lr 1
.G16r '
PP
4 , �' `" \r � r \ '• ate'.[
it r F
1
1 a+
Q
Packet Pg . 98
2 . 1
Future opportunities for land conservation and trails have also been identified for this area o
L
based on ditches, floodplains, and existing city- owned property. Those opportunities are c
numbered on the map below and listed below. N
1 . State Land Board Property (Sod Farm) Future Detention Pond - Could be used for
other uses such as a natural area.
as
a�
2 . Number Eight Ditch - Restore channel to appear more like a natural stream to a
improve the aesthetics, habitat, wildlife corridor, and safety. Construct a regional
trail along the improved channel, and create an outdoor classroom on the future
school community park sites . a
0
CU
3 . Consider purchasing land north of community park site for a natural area. 2
a
4. Future Trail Connection to Future Neighborhood Park Site - Connect a number of y
future and existing neighborhoods to the regional trail along the Number Eight =
Ditch. Wait for development to build trail and grant access .
0
S . Regional Trail - Construct trail through future park and development.
00
6 . Waterfield Development Future Natural Area - Acquire and develop site . Work with V)
Transportation regarding the realignment of Vine Drive . PSD wants to sell their
future school site, which was intended to be a park/school site . Most of the site is
south of the realigned Vine Drive . On hold waiting for development and Vine Drive E
E
relocation. 0
(U
7 . East Ridge Development - Barker Property/ Gravel Pit - Future Neighborhood Park,
cc
stormwater detention pond, and natural area. Park will likely acquire site for park,
potential for dedication by future development. v
L
cu
8 . Cooper Slough - likely work with developers to protect buffers along slough and E
provide regional trail corridor. Trail likely to cross Mulberry at signalized crossing.
co
Culvert under Mulberry is needed for stormwater flows and wildlife movement.
a�
L
11 . Dry Creek - potential trial, stream restoration/natural area restoration, future
neighborhood park/natural area, and flood control channel. v
N
12 . Neighborhood Park/natural area - potential to conserve land around park site .
13 . Storm drainage channel - potential for stream restoration versus a pipe .
0
2
16 . Future Detention Ponds - Storm Water will work with developers to create the
ponds and wildlife habitat.
E
U
6 MOUNTAIN VISTA
Packet Pg . 99
2 . 1
I�
WIT
I •L
y
7 O
' a
a �
Q
O
7 a
I It
c
00
a s •
- -1►' t6 `
- - - - - - - - - . ' o
U
. Yry �I►w a .. - - . . �. . C
113
l ' * >
t h
tt r
is
Floodplaln * Future Park Open Spaces Stormmter Master Plan }'
Paved rrarl —I Vaunt Lards Curverts
O
,.� Natural Surface Trill Ensmq Parks ----- Channels City of
a.r...w.r.. c ....,
PMpps,d Ty Cdr%wrvabon Easemems Ppea Fort Collins
•�••�•••�•••"•��"••••• OCay Lands Natural An:asDetentes Ponds �' \
ar�ssaalrl
Schools W
Potential Partnership Area NE Quad E
��� .�. ..,,•,.�^ Potential Partnership Area lOeror Cuadl
PnmM O� 0e 7013MOUNTAIN VISTA
�
a
Packet Pg . 100
2 . 1
Case Studies o
'i
To get a sense for how to integrate nature and urban agriculture in future Mountain Vista
developments, this study considered regional, community, and neighborhood scale case N
studies . At the regional scale, food produced onsite serves the area beyond the boundaries C
P
of the development. At the community scale, the agricultural uses are prominent and serve
the development. At the smallest or neighborhood scale, there are pocket elements of
i
agriculture the size of backyards, community gardens, and CSA ( Community Supported a
Agriculture) plots .
�a
J
Regional Scale a
From left to right, the following thumbnail illustrations represent Serenbe in Atlanta, O
Georgia; Honeywood Farm in Barnsville, Georgia; and Imperial Farm and Garden in Sugar Q
Land, Texas . 2
N
C
.7
SERENBE COMMUNITY MASTERPLAN rr. *�- — 0
W N i...,
°°
SIL
1# ow�J,
ALE
.. 3
+r + • .. � �, w - E
F"ASE IV
A HONEYWOOD FARM
o >
me
Flew
olf
Lim
I U
MADO HAMLET - • GRANGE HAMLET I memo
uyn ,.. -1 I 1 � r N� FARM HUB 2
rM
Fro` IML�
Irk
E
t
U
M
Q
MOUNTAIN
Packet Pg . 101
2 . 1
Community Scale o
•L
At the community scale, the 1 , 150 - acre Harvest development in Argyle, Texas, incorporates =
a�
a 5 -acre farm and community gardens among 3 , 200 single - family homes (top photos) . In N
Fort Collins, the 160 - acre Bucking Horse development includes 2 historic farms, a 2 . 5 - acre c
farm for community supported agriculture, and 1 , 100 single- and multi -family homes .
as
CL
a�
L
a
y
J
f + • t
�=ice•- � -. L-- _ _
L
� - -
N
7
O
00
' 11 N' • '1'+ I i^+
ti ■■ 7
i ,-I• �^ _ r. #� -uy E
O
U
c
Neighborhood Scale
At the neighborhood scale, the 100 - acre Cannery community in Davis, California, provides a
7 .4 - acre farm with a barn, cold storage, and equipment shed to serve 547 single - and multi - E
family homes . y
a�
at.r
a�
L
L
d-y• ' � _ a ` • • ,
dd
y E
V
MOUNTAIN VIST4,L=
Packet Pg . 102
2. 1
Opportunities o
L
Opportunities for integration of agricultural, natural, and community design elements at
the regional, community, and neighborhood level were voted on at both days of the staff can
rm
workshop and at the public open house events . The most popular opportunities by scale 0
are listed below with the number of votes in blue .
as
Regional Scale a
• Variety of housing types (8) • Diversity in dwelling styles, colors, a
rm
• Urban farming as buffers (7) materials, building footprint sizes
• Well placed open space - (4)
CL
integration of formal and informal • Integration of a higher percentage p
landscape space at various scales of community gardens/plots,
throughout the development rooftop gardens, and aquaponics (3 )
pattern (6) • Larger scale urban farming
• Water conservation and Low Impact operations interspersed with =
Design techniques (6) industrial uses (3 ) _
0
Community Scale
• Walking distance- close proximity • Food trail (4) M
to goods & services, employment, • Natural trail landscaped with native
and recreation ( 14) fruits and nuts (4) �
• Locate shopping and grocery near Trail through a linear farming area '
E
homes (8) (4) E
• Integration with healthy V
communities and active living (5 )
Neighborhood Scale
• Incorporation of alternative • Varied edge patterns - lot spacing, a
development patterns that build on open space form, building setbacks, M
E
the "complete neighborhood" model buffer patterns, trail/walk patterns E
with a unique urban/rural ( 11) co
m
character. This could be smaller • Maintain views of nature from
L
housing, ADU's, community space, homes and businesses (9)
alternative street designs/patterns, • Capitalize on open space corridors V
possibly larger block sizes, longer along the No. 8 Ditch to connect n
walkway spines, increased setbacks parks and trails (8)
in some areas, and/or smaller • Naturalize and utilize storm
setbacks. ( 17) drainage as a visual asset (5) 00
_
m
E
10 MOUNTAIN VISTA
Packet Pg . 103
2 . 1
Concepts o
'i
Illustrations of concepts developed during the charrette helped to determine how some of
the opportunities could be incorporated into the subarea to create a mosaic of natural N
areas and agricultural uses within residential and commercial development. 0
as
The first concept is an external agricultural scenario illustrating i
larger patches of agricultural lands bordering residential ,
, . development and incorporating easy access from residential to
natural areas . J
_
a�
a
0
The next concept shows an internal agricultural scenario with L
farmlands surrounded by residential development creating easy
access to a central food corridor internally and natural areas outside
of residential development.
i r• i f+
0
The final hybrid concept illustrates how residential development can 11
be surrounded by agriculture and natural areas . M
The drawings below show how food production can be incorporated in community E
E
development at the smallest scale, including alley gardens where households can grow food 0
in communal spaces behind their homes, median gardens where the space between traffic =
lanes can be cultivated, vertical gardens that are space efficient, and in front yards .
U
E
o E
o E• a
7
co
® N
tv
000
e U
, moo � 3 y
° f .
tv
0
� GLIM6IN(�
00 D G ►
t
Imp" V
MOUNTAIN VISTA 112
Packet Pg . 104
2 . 1
O
�L
Oplaoa
• 1 w • fC
�L7/Tf_ c
V
O
L
a
N
o �
e �
�. • GoMMUN / Tr J
e 56P�1+7Z7� �
CL
• '�� O
�s f°W
L
Q
N
� Wyl )
• (NN, o �/.JJl�YJ4s6 �
0 00
! Deco
• • ° • 0 0 M
O 0 MOM
1 O • %,M,M'
• o GLUSTeJZ • I
x4v
` sow
07
42p MIN
I ° • O o
? • o • .
'-- 7 c o • o
a
0
VA
c
..ftM"I%MI
.01
1 �
0
A. . �. .. u.. • .....rwi-' ..... •.r r ..._ yr. ,.. . � .._. � _ �qM.+.d :,, � . . . ..... . . ........ I• C
y 1I . . .V.Y. - I.Y * norti� ao c.— Y.rJ.r. 1r/l�f.�..•Y/� fY..� f.v.•. .1. I . lW.I�I �f
Y. Y - M ..�..�� .♦ M ....r.�. .�f 4WI N . .
fY � � IJ�I eI Irf�/1. �.Ilol•GY I.r
V
a
Packet Pg . 105
2 . 1
Framework Plans 10
After considering opportunities at a number of scales, conceptual framework plans were
developed that incorporate some of the topics discussed above . N
O
Framework A: Living Corridor
The Living Corridor Scenario connects agriculture through the Mountain Vista Subarea via N
the No . 8 Ditch and allows food production to be intensively cultivated in the floodplain . a
This green arterial links the proposed north and south detention areas with a riparian
corridor that offers a variety of parks, open space, and wildlife habitat nestled within farms .
_
This concept provides for water detention and filtration while maintaining agricultural a
uses in proximity to clustered housing, offices, shops, parks, schools, and light industrial O
uses . Because the multiuse corridor is centrally located, all trails and open spaces provide Q
a high level of accessibility to agritourism and local food businesses, such as greenhouses,
educational campuses, a community kitchen, and a farmer' s market.
.�
iiiiii V77akv „y` AALVW�T *Jill
pGMO
ra O
INSPIRE
vi 00
Jill
y l
M
® 6� E
dd fl.C�R'A&S 0
i46&^f1iVTcfde
.Sta,�s/TitGL .
4c*4z- X;Nwi/Ar-5r, AEMcNbTRkT
Jill
U
L
G� YELC3� 3'/EGT�.e ELTJill 1111111111111111111111,11L7
Ld/L✓�LIFi �i1�7�)T�Gp E
� ,, VIP
a�
07
11AAMI�tT� A N9.�'E GLGST��
�a4 Sepr� A 1D GaMM �� a�
Q
Jill MOUNTAIN ,
Packet Pg . 106
2 . 1
o_
l f
1'
I/ C OF
4f ko (1)
A+# A TNT
. v V
o s �
o
� S/NG �
i W
ar_`� IGPjyTG2 I CaQ/4 � Q ter, . �iSTI�/ TiGiv
�L�4KE o
o '
o w+►j I �
co
i �� /oI • o \ '�
,tor
° \
. o
'3 .0 d%oj
Aefo
PIS
VIA *40
_ �. ° ° o
y. o
°
A T[J 24& ° fn
c °
a o
- — o
N�T�-
a .. o
I �
d
E
t�
14 MOUNTAIN VISTA
cv
a
Packet Pg . 107
2 . 1
Framework B : Access to Nature o
'i
The second plan scenario has more of a mosaic approach to integrating agriculture with =
a�
residential and commercial development with more programmed single family N
development types including senior housing, tiny homes, and an agricultural based c
community. This plan includes social nodes where food cultivation can be an interactive
social area highlighting easy access for all generations and ability levels . This plan features N
a�
transit stops with different prominent themes, and ensures that all land uses are accessible a
within one half mile of the central hub . This scenario makes natural areas such as the new
_
southern lakes and interconnected nature trails highly accessible from anywhere in the
subarea. It illustrates how a hybrid of community uses can all be integrated including a
housing, transit, community centers, schools, commercial uses, trails and natural areas, O
parks, and agriculture . Figure H illustrates how community food cultivation could occur on Q
a linear pathway instead of a gathering node . A food trail might consist of native foods
N
growing naturally as well as CSAs or small farm stands selling fresh produce . >
0
CO
f E
E
EQ.lTX1�/�!L o _ U
® ai
Y
v,..r.� M
>
H�FTL�.4L �Icl� U
6C�ss/Gl7@ Lago M
47
�1? p E
O
� � ✓ � ate+
'e 49
0
17
Ti4/N'�.�✓T � , T�✓�S �
N.BT�i/CYgi� �;
_
/bP��i4�i1bLE E
Q
Packet Pg . 108
2 . 1
Updated Goals for the Mountain Vista Subarea 10
cc
Input from stakeholder interviews, staff workshops, and public meetings were integrated
with the goals and policies from related City plans to formulate the following goals, which N
are listed in order of popularity based on the cumulative votes received from the staff 0
P
workshops and public meetings (in blue) . The top goals include incorporation of balanced �
development with open space, agriculture, trails and/or sidewalks, transportation
L
improvements, wildlife habitat, and community facilities . a
1 . Conserve, create and enhance natural spaces and agricultural areas with easy, J
walkable access to provide diverse social and ecological opportunities . ( 20 )
a
0
2 . Develop partnerships among property owners and the City to provide needed
L
transportation, storm drainage, open space, natural areas and other public Q
infrastructure improvements . ( 19 ) n
3 . Incorporate alternative development patterns that build on the "complete Y
neighborhood" model with a unique urban/rural character. ( 18) c
4. Provide a balanced system of recreation facilities, parks, trails, natural areas, and 00
open lands . ( 15 )
M
S . Expand and enhance transit system to serve the area. ( 14)
E
6 . The Mountain Vista sub - area will have a balance of residential, employment, E
0
commercial, civic, and open lands uses . ( 14) v
ai
7 . Use innovative community design principles that represent best practices in cc
housing design, neighborhood form, housing affordability, neighborhood livability,
and the integration of agriculture, community gardens, greenhouses, commercial v
gardens, private gardens, larger agricultural operations, and natural systems . ( 12 ) cu
E
8 . Provide a connected agricultural and open space network accessible to the entire co
community that provides a variety of experiences and functional habitat for people, Y
a�
plants and wildlife . (9 ) L
�a
9 . Encourage urban agriculture and local food production to improve availability and
accessibility of healthy foods, and to provide other educational, economic, and social
benefits building off the existing zoning framework. ( 7)
10 . Develop partnership with groups such as Gardens on Spring Creek, Poudre School 0
District, Coalition for Activity and Nutrition to Defeat Obesity, farmers markets,
Community Supported Agriculture programs (CSAs) , and others, as well as
E
supporting the development of a potential year-round community marketplace . ( 5l U
16 MOUNTAIN VISTA
Packet Pg . 109
i
, i
i
i
' i
i
J �
.1 l. '
la. 440
14 lie
1 I _ I 11 — 1 rro va7e�9 — I 1 '�• I
ATTACHMENT 3 2 . 3
City Of Planning, Development & Transportation
Fort Collins281 North College Avenue
P.O. Box 580
Fort Collins, CO 80522.0580
970.221 .6376
970.224.6134 - fax
O
L
MEMORANDUM =
m
U
DATE: June 12, 2015 N
O
TO : Mayor Troxell and City Councilmembers
m
THRU : Darin Atteberry, City Managers
Jeff Mihelich, Deputy City Managers if a
Laurie Kadrich, Director of Planning, evelopment & Transportation'
�a
J
FROM: Cameron Gloss, Planning Manager
�� a
RE : Work Session Summary — June 9, 2025 re: Mountain Vista Subarea Plan Assessment
of Alternative Rural Scenario
a
Attendees: y
Cameron Gloss presented results from the assessment of an alternative Rural Scenario to the Mountain =
Vista Subarea Plan and responded to questions from Council. All City Council members were present Y
(Mayor Troxell via telephone conference). c
Specific Question to be Answered by City Council : 00
Should staff move into a second phase of the analysis, including outreach to Mountain Vista property M
owners and the public?
Lo
Discussion Summary N
■ The majority of Council members did not support the Alternative Rural Scenario. Q'
m
■ Recognition was given to the substantial thought and effort that went into the Mountain Vista
Subarea Plan (both the original and amended versions).
■ Most Council members suggested that the rural alternative did not meet the City's Climate
Action Plan and affordable housing goals. E
■ Council suggested a preference for further area property owner outreach should it be E
accommodated through the project budget. co
■ Suggestion was made that further analysis of alternative growth patterns might help the City c
understand the gaps in the current Mountain Vista Plan both from a design and financial
standpoint. co
L
O
Follow-up Items:
Council requested that staff work with area property owners to better understand community
development in the Mountain Vista Area and report back to Council on results of the outreach effort.
E
Specific areas to be addressed within the outreach :
M
■ Application of new policy initiatives such as Nature in the City, Urban Agriculture and the Q
Housing Affordability Policy Study that have occurred since the Mountain Vista Subarea was
adopted.
1
Packet Pg . 111
2 .3
of
blons
■ Partnership opportunities among property owners and with the City to provide infrastructure
improvements.
■ Promote innovative community design principles that represent best practices in housing c
design, neighborhood livability, and the integration of agriculture and natural systems.
m
U
Cn
rm
s'
m
m
L
a
�a
J
_
N
Q
0
N
L
a
N
_
_
7
O
O
M
LO
TOM
N
O
N
_
7
7
L
M
E
E
7
CO
_
O
.y
N
d
CO
Y
L
O
_
E
V
Q
June 9, 2015 Council Work Session Summary Page 2
Mountain Vista Alternative Scenario update
June 12, 2015
Packet Pg . 112
ATTACHMENT 4 2 .4
O
.L
CU
a
U
Cn
a
City • • / • O
� +
Fort Collins
t/1
L
a
Cn
�a
J
C
Q
0
� L
a
U)
O
00
44*
O
ca
a
4)
Cn
N
L
a
.o
Mountain Vista :
a
Open Lands Preservationa>
3
O
a
c
a�
E
U
fU
Q
Packet Pg . 113
CU
r.
Cn
r.
City of 0
Fort Collins
a.
Mountain Vista : Subarea OvervieCID
w
Cn
.�. s1 .
• ' ' I 3 . .
Boundary 0
Growth
Management
ro ;
1rea 1
Ili t
Boundary
.I
•
*)rsolto Rd
. ■
City Limits
` - -
1
• � q •
Cn
U.
■
i •
t ■
---
Packet
2
. g
2 .4
O
�L
CU
a
V
City of NOW
, Fort CollinsNow
M
i
Subarea Context
N
O
L
a
• 2 , 989 Total acres
G . M . A. 1 , 298 acres - Low Density Mixed Use o
b " LMN Neighborhood
g ( ) Q
i 144 acres - Medium Density Mixed
Use Neighborhood ( MMN ) o
Y cc�
\ i G
660 acres - Employment ( 65 % ) M
• 450 acres - Industrial ( 50 % )
Al
�. 400 acres - Open land , community L
a
park and school site
a
L
d
O
a
c
a�
E
U
f�
Q
Packet Pg . 115
2 .4
O
�L
CU
a
V
City of NOW
, Fort CollinsOz
i
Plan Background
L
a
. .:,: Framework Plan J
� ... . . wm
Mountain Vista s: a
SUBAREA PLAN O
is
m
L
a
Update N
CD
00
M
1999 12008 - 2009 2009 2015 0
Framework Plan Plan Update Plan Update Rural Scenario
Adopted Adopted Assessment L
a
.o
a
L
d
O
a
c
a�
E
M
tU
tE
Q
Packet Pg . 116
2 .4
O
L
CU
_
U
City of NOW
nz
,� tCollins RuralOWN
M
i
Summary : Scenario Assessment N
O
L
a
J
_
Greater agricultural production within the City Housing Becomes Less Affordable o
L
Fewer collector streets constructed Increased VMT and congestion on City streets
Fewer City services and programs needed Substantial Increase in Regional Green
House Gas Emissions o
Greater potential to enhance natural habitat Loss of Street Oversizing Fees to cover costs
of regionally- induced transportation impacts
_
Insufficient density to support transit
_
Stranded assets - arterial streets & school site L
a
Substantial Loss in Job Opportunities a.
L
d
O
a
_
a
E
M
U
f
Q
Packet Pg . 117
2 .4
0
L
CU
a
U
0
— � 0 oil CU
—
d
Environmental Economic Social
L
a
Decrease in Mountain Vista Vehicle Decrease - Housing affordability Decrease in potential Mountain Vista Cn
rm
Miles Travelled (VMT) and range of housing types population
Significant loss of jobs within Affordable housing land supply Q
Increase in regional VMT industrial I employment lands shifts to outside of City °
L
z Many planned transportation and Higher housing prices within the Q
CO a emissions -- Regional increase
at 2040 of 94 metric tons stormwater improvements still City ; increased pressure on existing
needed neighborhoods
CO2e emissions -- Mountain Vista Decrease — fees collected for Greater traffic on local roads due to
0
decrease of 15 metric tons general services associated regional traffic increase
Increase -- regional air pollution with Fewer City services and programs Lack of transit opportunity linking M
net VMT needed in Subarea Mountain Vista to central Fort Collins
rm
0
Decrease -- solid waste generated Reduction — sales and property tax No Community Park site or
revenues recreation center 0)
Increase -- Large farming tracts + - 50 % of acquired PSD school site Lost opportunity for expanded trail a
remains Habitat preservation becomes a stranded asset networks o
a
61
Potential Increase -- oil and gas Lost opportunity to restore I enhance
interest habitat with development a
E
U
fU
Q
Packet Pg . 118
2 .4
0
�L
CO
a
U
O
ID.i
y COJ.M1 MMr YO
At
1 • i L
a.
L,.i • . . • . - . • • Ail
• • 1 � 1
M1 a ..
L
'4,1
>
• rrro c'ro 0 0
till awr O
rill n12L
00
ram' - r
K,
M
' Y.t 1... a.
r� �,. -, -�. o
`I ipil - _ Interstate Cities Rivers Mae
_ r•
L L Highway Subregion Lakes
Local Road Mountain Vista c
-' - i f Subarea Plan
r- Railroad c
c
a�
a.
U
f0
little
Packet Pg . 119
2 .4
O
L
CU
a
V
City of o
, Fort Collins nz
Form i
Direction • • • y
L
a
Cn
Ma
rM
• Further property owner outreach
• Specific topics to be incorporated : CU
i
a
CU
• Nature in the City N
• Urban Agriculture
O
• Housing Affordability Policy Study
M
• Investigate partnership opportunities for infrastructure improvements
• Promote innovative community design principles that enhance Cn
livability and integrate agricultural and natural systems
.o
a
L
d
O
a
c
a
E
M
tU
f�
Q
Packet Pg . 120
2 .4
O
�L
CU
_
OEM Cn
City of o
, Fort Collins
D es '
.• ••
N
O
L
a
Cn
Ma
_
• 58 attendees over a two - day charrette ( Nov 2 and 3 ) and a public
_
open house ( Nov 9 ) 0
0
L
• Opportunities and constraints N
• Goals =
_
• Ideas for regional , community, and neighborhood scale
implementation of goals M
• Priorities o
• Audience : Property owners , interested residents , City staffCn
_
L
a
.o
a
L
d
O
a
_
a�
E
M
tU
f�
Q
Packet Pg . 121
2 .4
O
L
CU
_
V
Cn
City of o
, Fort Collins
i
N
a
Cn
ma
r.
a
• Vision for the Mountain Vista Subarea : Provide a framework for
successful and innovative community design . CU
L
a
• One of the last remaining major growth areas in the City N
_
• Intended to have a new community center, enhanced multimodal
O
travel corridors , industrial lands , employment areas , a new
W
community park and open lands .
_
• Fresh concepts for incorporating urban agriculture and natural
0
Cn
spaces into future development to preserve rural character
a
.o
a
L
d
O
a
_
a
E
tU
f
Q
Packet Pg . 122
2 .4
0
L
CU
_
V
Cn
City of NOW o
, Fort CollinsNNW
" Living Corridor" i
Concept
L
a
0
Connections to ace green s throughout
g p g
subarea ; preservation of open lands o
Integration of public and private spaces
Encouraging cluster development
_
�' • , .�"~ --� I Incorporation of agriculture at several scales
00
E MI/V ' Achieve necessary density while maintaining
c _ • . • � rural character °
� � m
, a
'o
a
"` a
3
0
a
_
a
E
M
U
f
Q
Packet Pg . 123
2 .4
0
�L
V
0
z
• i i N ! M
W
N
urg. sue y
• ' • gr,,w lurry
I � �
I , �
u
1 c
7
�- 0
0
Cn
4 dd 33 3
� �� � �� �� • �.i' >,,. ` " ` .`.,. fin'` ,y i" _
i�� •�....�M•.ct � F�.� i } � I O
�narc � a
d
C
d
U
tE
Q
Packet Pg . 124
2 .4
O
L
CU
_
V
City of NOW
, Fort CollinsOz
"Agriburban " Development
a
Cn
MO
• Models for integrating agriculture and housing :
1 . Agricultural retention — preserve farmland ( regional scale )
L
2 . Urban agriculture — small - scale production , underutilized spaces N
3 . Agricultural urbanism — working farm associated with a
neighborhood /subdivision ( low resident involvement )
M
4 . Agrarian urbanism — working farm integrated into a M
neighborhood /subdivision ( high resident involvement )
O
_
• Typically organic/ low or no pesticides and herbicides Cn
L
a
• Mountain Vista could have elements of several of these models . a.
L
d
O
a
_
a
E
tU
f
Q
Packet Pg . 125
2 .4
O
L
CU
a
U
City of NOW
, Fort CollinsOz
"Agriburban " Development
a
Cn
Ma
• Agriburban development is similar to a typical golf course community,
but the clubhouse and golf course are replaced with a barn and farm . o
L
a
• Benefits of agriburban development
• Health — physical activity, access to recreation , open space
O
• IM
M
Environment — waste reduction , local food production
M
• Economy — reduction in lawn /turf maintenance costs and
0
pesticide/ herbicide costs ( if organic production )
Cn
• Social — gathering places , sense of place , cross - generational
activity
0
a
L
d
O
a
c
a
E
M
U
f
Q
Packet Pg . 126
CU
r.
Cn
r.
City of 0
Fort Collins
a.
cc »
Agriburban Development ,
t Uzi i +i • • •
1 TS� t ,
♦ ttt yyr ��.0 un� .
` It ♦ tt ysi ♦♦ ' , t .
neighborhood design 0
w ♦ o �
A F. ♦ ♦� ,. , t4Yyyy
► • 0 men ' •� `�rYY A
Neighborhood livability
Integration of agriculture
and natural systems
Sim
a.
inkVistai
♦ �. 1, v ♦ ♦♦♦ " , ti ♦♦♦� 4t4Y
�.. . . .
o
15 0
2 .4
0
•L
CU
r.
V
CO
City of o
Fort Collins
wwr i
Case Study : 1 I ( Gilbert , AZ )
L
a
0
Ma
• Broke ground in 2000
kllitlkl Ilk
}'ta - - 160 acres
Ilk
• 452 single -family homes L
• a
117 - unit assisted living center
i
kill L
• 16 acres certified organic
�' � '�- ' (�s farmland — vegetable , fruit , small 0
_k ,�. livestock
� _ Neighborhood square , 0
" "� , ''�X �,' "� a farmstand coffeehouse farm - to -
ah
' "� kk
Cn
' ' . , _ : - , ;� table restaurant
t„r_
.WALL�i -'��:y --���- _ -vu'�C1/uuar- _ � - •' •' ,ar•..#:1.r1 M
• CSA option for residents a.
0
• a
c
a�
E
M
tU
f�
Q
Packet Pg . 128
r.
Cn
r.
City of
CU Fort Collins
a.
Cluster Development
Cn
Grouping development on a
site to preserve more land for 0
open space , recreation , or
agricultural uses
Helps achieve multiple 0
ity goals
communi
Several scales , from subarea
clustering to subdivision
Cn
design a,
a.
r _
.c
•
17
Packet
. g
2 .4
0
�L
CU
a
V
City of Now
, Fort Collins
i
Example : . ( FortCollins ,
L
a
0
Broke ground in 2002
.. ..-r - . a
W , ^ I" °� 106 acres °
,uv .1 �„ ,
• 481 units
Q
r . ' s ' iZ a •mill Clustering shows a similar land
Al
Iwo
" '' : s use pattern to agriburban
JJ �� • .� ►1 • • • 11 • • I111 •
WWdevelopment
Could be applied to Mountain Vista
f
Green spaces = agriculture
Strong connections to open lands
.o
a
L
d
O
a
c
a�
E
tU
f�
+r
Q
Packet Pg . 130
r.
CIO
r.
City of
CU Fort Collins
Example : Greenwood Cottages ( WA ) ;
■CID
10 d / u per acre
v .;,Ply ^ _ , � �'. � ; , r'+• - - - -� _ --
Smaller units 768 to
998 square feet U)
ice` Y
Shared community
44*
Built under a specific M
J r■�y�f■ `M_ 00
7
„ " Cottage Housing •
�n . • pment
code
CID
- - • I condos
•
�,, ■
19 :
Packet . •
2 .4
O
�L
CU
_
U
Cn
City of NOW o
, Fort Collins
i
Open Lands in Mountain
L
a
_
• To incorporate Nature in the City into the Mountain Vista Subarea
Plan , this concept focuses on preserving and connecting open lands o
L
a
• Types of open lands :
_
• Agricultural production =
O
m
• Stormwater detention Go
M
• Parks
_
O
• Trails/ pedestrian network
_
• Redesigned # 8 Ditch a
.o
a
L
d
O
a
_
a�
E
U
f�
Q
Packet Pg . 132
2 .4
0
�L
CU
_
V
Cn
City of o
, Fort Collins
own i
Example : Community • I & Gardens
L
a
0
_
• Integrated with Enhanced Travel
School 4Employment/Cluster 0.Corridors and re tonal bike/bike/ pedestrian o
� Development �, g p
0 trail system
0
0 N
o •
- Focal point for PSD school site , cluster
development , residential o
Agriculture Community Park M
Innovation and Gardens neighborhood , and Commercial Center 11
Lab
• Park use and community gardens
Cn
Connects to other " fingers " of open
community
Residential
Neighborhood Commercial lands
a.
a�
3
0
a
_
a�
E
U
f�
Q
Packet Pg . 133
2 .4
0
L
_
W
V
City of o
Frt Collins
-mom" Example : Redesigned # 8 Ditch
a
N
A =
R 06i'S'N Q- •.A(ZR� a.> A �
NEl7WGNMEM AND SIDE SLOPES (Q
TE A MORE NATURAL CKAAAOER d
\ `
ENABLE >
-+ E - �V �NEL w�TH =
-
S' OSER TO ER NNE _ 3
DER TO NElh1R 0
,• ,�
00
hATE .5 EOq RAVRO` ED
• • ��v v } _ HABITAT
A _
0
t � l
M , P4*0
a
L
3
0
a
m
�a
Q
Packet Pg . 134
2 .4
O
L
CO
a
V
City of NOW
, Fort CollinsOz
i
Fill
Example : Kederike Property Concept W
a�
L
a
Ma
(:
ITActes . . • Integration of
on d
Natural Park sto rmwate r and :z
21 4Acres ar- Natural Party' Trail
Trail 9,4 Acres al- I 21 .4 Attu al- 0)
\`• iParking Son Race recreation / park use a
Trail TrailTreil
Connections
r N
eMN
= Proceeds from
MMN 89A 1 % . development o
Sunrg. ( LMN / MMN ) could
t1 .9Accres *I. �I MMN + Na�relArear °m finance infrastructure
17 8 Aaea H• �l Natural ater �„
Stamwatar ' Future Stortnwatx \�
28.45 Acres 16 Acres +1- I , 0
j development
cn
C^ Still a conceptual plan
Kederike Properly Concept B I Natural Park `• ' PM P" Will a,�„ M d
- - L
hl; 4. 201e Nor is sole y
O
a
c
a�
E
tU
ff3
4�
Q
Packet Pg . 135
2 .4
O
�L
CU
_
U
Cn
City of o
, Fort Collins
NNW i
AgricultureIncorporating W
L
a
Cn
Ma
_
• Agricultural production at multiple scales
_
0
• Sensitive to stormwater concernsCU
L
a
CU
U)
• Levels of resident involvement could vary ; from more traditional
subdivisions to more agriburban developments =
O
• Encourage innovative food production methods , including
aquaponics , greenhouses , and rooftop farms/gardens =
O
_
Cn
U.
a
.o
a
L
d
O
a
_
a�
E
M
U
M
Q
Packet Pg . 136
2 .4
O
�L
CU
r.
V
Cn
City of o
, Fort Collins
NNW i
AgricultureIncorporating
L
a
Cn
Scales of Agriculture -
Farm
Neighborhood
Farm
1 a.F a
Community
— Garden
7
Rooftop
rGarden
17�r M
1 _
r
Personal
GardenCn
d
a
L
d
O
a
c
a�
E
M
tU
M
Q
Packet Pg . 137
2 .4
O
�L
CU
a
U
City of NOW
, Fort CollinsOz
OWN M
i
Example : Greenhouses • W
L
a
Cn
Ma
• High -value crops ( fruits ,
vegetables , etc . ) can be grown in o
smaller, more intensive spaces
with minimal visual impact
- -- -- Very water efficient , especially 0 0
when combined with aquaponics 00
M
- - - -
( fish production )
• Potential for high energy
Cn
efficiency with careful design
.o
a
L
d
O
• a
c
a�
E
M
U
f�
Q
Packet Pg . 138
Example : Community Garden ;
' 1w.10
0 Ave
i
VO
41 Vol.
44
i
< `
. LL
a a / + t A •
1
IMP
` ,. • - ♦
1AFve
beell N
1 _ oil• 1jl \ ' ..�.
27 :
2 .4
O
L
CU
a
U
Cn
City of NOW o
, Fort Collins RuralDensity &
i
Character
N
O
L
a
Cn
ma
• There are several opportunities to maintain the rural " feel " of the
Mountain Vista area as density increases , o
d
L
a
• Elements of rural character N
• Roads — use county cross - sections approved in LCUASS for o
streets in the Mountain Vista subarea IM
Go
• Network of pedestrian paths in lieu of sidewalks on a grid
O
• Regional trail network
Cn
• Cluster development
L
a
• Lighting — more at key intersections , less elsewhere
a.
d
O
a
c
a
E
U
f
Q
Packet Pg . 140
2 .4
0
�L
)4
a
U
City of NOW
, Fort Collins Rurallow Density
i
Character
N
O
L
a
0
51' ROW (MIND �
4.5 4.9 J
WALK WALK
5 5 (MIN) 30 ROADWAY (MM
UTIL. 46' ROW UTIL. IT 6'
ESMT. I I ESMT. I aKvrr Ravr O
IMN.) IMN.I
6'.5 Min. Fence Setback (3
9' 28' 9' g i
Roadway I U-n
ESMT. 15 g UTIL. N
— Fence TRAVEL ESMT. ;
BARK PARK �
7 I fa
C
7
Rural Local Road Residential Local Street
Go
- No sidewalk - 4 . 5 ft sidewalk M
- Internal to developments - All residential local streets
- Minimum lot size 1 acre - No minimum lot size
- 300 vehicles per day - 1 , 000 vehicles per day
.o
a
L
d
• 0
a
c
a�
E
U
f'3
Q
Packet Pg . 141
Example : Skyway Drive
Iola ' /
�r
f_
30 :
3
Example : North Shields Street ;
'! 'o's is
■
31 :
2 .4
0
L
CU
a
V
City of NOW
, Fort CollinsNNW
Next Steps
i
N
a
0
Ma
• Possible next steps .
• Analysis — more thorough review of existing LUC standards o
• Integration of Capital Improvements related to stormwater
• Revisit street standard designs to promote rural character
• Design Guidelines based on best practices for innovative housing , o
urban agriculture and habitat preservation
M
• Partnerships ( public agencies , private developers , CSR' s )
0
• Drawbacks .
Cn
• This kind of development is challenging to implement
• Requires committed , creative developers a.
0
a
c
a
E
M
tU
f
Q
Packet Pg . 144
2 .4
O
�L
CU
_
U
Cn
City of o
, Fort Collins
i
Question • Council
L
a
ma
_
�a
J
_
d
Q
0
What is the best way to implement the Mountain Vista Open Lands
L
a
Preservation vision ? N
_
_
O
M
00
44*
_
O
cv
_
d
Cn
d
U.
a
.o
a
L
d
O
a
_
a�
E
U
f�
Q
Packet Pg . 145
DATE : April 26 , 2016
STAFF : Kurt Friesen , Director of Park Planning & Development WORK SESSION ITEM
Mike Calhoon , Parks Supervisor City Council
SUBJECT FOR DISCUSSION
Refreshing Fort Collins Parks .
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
The purpose of this item is to inform Council about refreshing Fort Collins parks . Fort Collins parks are aging and
in need of improvements in order for them to adequately meet the growing demands of today' s users . Currently,
there are two programs in place for construction and infrastructure replacement in parks , the park build -out and
park life cycle programs . These programs provide funding for construction of new parks in the city and
replacement or restoration of existing park components . Both of these programs have inadequate funding .
Currently there is not a program in place for adapting parks to meet the changing needs of park users . There are
numerous reasons to refresh parks . These include keeping pace with changing trends in recreation , adapting to
changing community needs , providing equitable park experiences city wide , connecting people with nature , and
replacing and improving antiquated infrastructure.
A proposed process for refreshing parks has been identified , and is currently being implemented at City Park . The
steps for this process include project goal identification , preparation of initial concepts , gathering community input,
master plan development, phase I project identification , and phased construction based on available funding . The
focus of the park refresh program should be on community parks , as these typically are more programmed than
neighborhood parks . It is estimated that approximately 50 million dollars are needed to refresh 4 aging community
parks . There are numerous benefits to parks , including economic benefits as illustrated by studies completed by
the National Recreation and Parks Association and Trust for Public Land .
GENERAL DIRECTION SOUGHT AND SPECIFIC QUESTIONS TO BE ANSWERED
City staff is seeking direction on whether Council agrees with the park refresh concept and would like City staff to
further investigate funding mechanisms for refreshing parks . In support of this concept, Council needs to be
aware of funding deficiencies in the park build out and park life cycle programs . Specific questions to be
answered include :
1 . What feedback does Council have regarding the park refresh concept?
2 . What direction does Council have regarding funding options for refreshing parks?
3 . What feedback does Council have regarding park build out and life cycle programs?
BACKGROUND / DISCUSSION
Fort Collins parks provide an invaluable role in citizen ' s lives . They provide sports venues , engaging play
environments for children to learn and explore , open spaces to enjoy a picnic , read a book or throw a frisbee , and
quiet places for relaxation and rejuvenation . With over 48 parks totaling 957 acres , Fort Collins provides quality
parks dispersed throughout the city, most conveniently located within walking distance from homes . Parks
consistently rate very high on citizen surveys . Since 2008 , over 90% of citizens have rated the quality of Fort
Collins parks as "good" or "very good" . Parks are well used by citizens throughout the city. Some of the most
significant community events take place in parks , including the Independence Day celebration in City Park , the
annual kite festival in Spring Canyon Park , Tour de Fat in Washington Park , and multiple concerts and fairs in
Civic Center Park . In 2015 , over 4 , 800 sporting events occurred in Fort Collins parks , with over 170 , 000 attending
Packet Pg . 146
April 26 , 2016 Page 2
these events . Parks are integral to the health and well -being of citizens , and provide an important role in reducing
obesity and maintaining a healthy lifestyle . The most beloved activity in parks is walking , as many Fort Collins'
residents begin or end each day with a walk around one of Fort Collins parks .
Currently, there are two programs in place for construction and for infrastructure replacement in parks , Park Build
Out and Park Life Cycle . A brief summary of these programs follows :
Park Build Out
The Parks and Recreation Policy Plan , most recently updated in 2008 , provides a blueprint for new park
construction in the City. Not including Southeast Community Park , which is anticipated to be constructed soon ,
there are 2 community parks and 13 neighborhood parks remaining to be constructed in the city. The majority of
these parks will be located in the northeast portion of the City, as development occurs in this area . City staff
coordinates with developers to identify and purchase park properties based on the plan . Design and development
of the park typically begins after approximately 75% of homes around the park have been constructed . Impact
fees paid at the time of building permit issue provide funding for new parks . Current parks being developed
include Southeast Community Park , located at the intersection of Ziegler and Kechter, and Maple Hill Park ,
located near the intersection of Country Club Road and Turnberry.
New park costs have increased dramatically over the last few years . New park components include raw water,
land , consultant fees , development fees , miscellaneous costs , and construction . A ten year projection of
Community Park and Neighborhood Park impact fees fall short of what is needed to fund new park construction .
In order to keep pace with rising costs , City staff recommends an increase to the impact fees . An evaluation of
park impact fees is currently underway, with a recommendation to Council anticipated later this year.
Park Life Cycle
The park life cycle program repairs and renovates park assets throughout the existing park system . Initiated in
1993 , this program supports repair and renovation of over 1 , 000 varied park assets within many different
component categories including : hardscapes , buildings , fields , trails , courts , structures , playgrounds , irrigation ,
and water related park components . The program prioritizes repairs based on health and safety concerns and
regulatory related mandates (such as the Americans with Disabilities Act) . The program also looks for
opportunities to replace outdated resource intensive infrastructure with more sustainable infrastructure that meets
current codes and best management practices . Typically, the Life Cycle Program completes 30-40 projects per
year including items like playground renovations , court asphalt repairs , minor irrigation repairs , walkway and
bridge repairs , lighting upgrades , park roadway and parking lot repairs , painting buildings , etc . This program is
essential to repairing the infrastructure of existing park facilities as well as enhancing the infrastructure to support
growing demand in the parks . The life cycle program also is imperative to preserving equity within the City to
ensure that every household , regardless of the age of the neighborhood , has access to high quality parks .
In 2002 , the Parks Life Cycle program was funded at $463 , 160 for 703 acres of park land which equates to $660
per acre . During the recession the funding was cut back to $275 , 533 . In 2016 , the Parks Life Cycle program was
funded at $526 , 152 for 957 acres which equates to $550 per acre . Life cycle funding has not kept pace with park
land expansion or increasing costs .
Based on the current park asset inventory and current component repair and renovation costs , the Parks Life
Cycle fund needs a minimum of $2 , 500 per acre to address major park life cycle needs (hardscapes , restrooms ,
playgrounds , irrigation systems , bridges and some structures ) . A BFO offer will be proposed in the 2017- 18
budget cycle to address the Park Life Cycle shortfall .
Park Refresh
Park Refresh is a new concept for Fort Collins . Over time , park user needs change , and it is not always
appropriate to replace the same aged park element with a new one , as provided through the Life Cycle program .
Instead , it makes sense to update parks for several reasons :
Packet Pg . 147
April 26 , 2016 Page 3
1 . Keep pace with changing trends in recreation
New trends in recreation are continually emerging . For example , today pickleball is a sport that has rapidly grown
in popularity nationwide and in Northern Colorado . Pickleball players have expressed a desire for dedicated ,
lighted pickleball courts in Fort Collins . There is a need for parks to accommodate this emerging use . There are
many other similar recreational activities in demand .
2. Adapt to changing community needs
As evidenced by the many ways City Park has been used over its 100+ year history, parks must be versatile and
adapt to changing needs of the community. A desire for healthy living , locally grown food , and greater
connections with nature are in demand among Fort Collins residents . Today there is a high level of citizen interest
in community gardens and nature play environments . Fort Collins parks should adapt to these and other changing
needs .
3. Provide equitable park experiences city wide
Newer parks in the southern parts of the City including Fossil Creek Park and Spring Canyon Park provide
amenities such as skate parks , dog parks , newer playgrounds , and quality restrooms and shelters . Older parks
including Lee Martinez and City Park in the northern part of the city do not provide the same level of service as
these newer parks . A park refresh would raise the level of service in older parks to match the newer parks .
4. Connect people with nature
Fort Collins parks provide an excellent venue to connect residents with nature . Naturalistic plantings within parks
create environments that provide a nature retreat for residents , demonstrate the value of native or xeric plants ,
provide wildlife habitat, and contrast beautifully with turf areas . Many Fort Collins parks are Audubon Certified ,
and provide valuable sanctuary for birds . Many parks in the city lack this natural character, and would benefit from
a park refresh to enhance and improve residents' connections with nature .
5. Replace and improve antiquated infrastructure
Fort Collins parks are aging . The average age of parks within Fort Collins is 27 years . Infrastructure including
parking lots , drives , irrigation systems and lighting have exceeded their life cycle and are in need of replacement.
Many parks were constructed before the Americans with Disabilities Act was in effect, and require upgrades to
bring them to current standards . A park refresh would enable parks to be improved to meet current needs and
replace aging infrastructure .
A six step process for refreshing parks is proposed :
1 . Identify project goals
2 . Prepare initial concepts
3 . Gather community Input
4 . Develop a park master plan
5 . Identify a phase I project
6 . Phased construction based on available funding
This process is currently underway for City Park . There is some available funding for improvements to City Park
through the Building on Basics capital tax . Funding has been identified for replacement of the City park train ,
improvements to Club Tico , and minimal improvements to the park . Project goals and initial concepts for the park
were developed , and two community meetings for the project were conducted in early March . All project materials
are available on the project web site for community review and comment. After the comment period closes , a
master plan for the core area of the park will be developed , a phase I project identified based on available
funding , and construction of a phase I project will begin . Subsequent phases will be constructed as funding
becomes available . This is the process proposed for future park refresh efforts .
Packet Pg . 148
April 26 , 2016 Page 4
Although both neighborhood and community parks are in need of refreshing , the primary focus should be on
community parks , as they are typically more program intensive than neighborhood parks . Estimates for refreshing
parks are very conceptual at this point, as no planning has been conducted . Assuming approximately '/2 of the
acreage of a park is improved , the cost for improvements to the four oldest community parks (City Park , Rolland
Moore , Lee Martinez, and Edora ) , may cost approximately 50 million (2016 dollars ) .
Parks are a Good Investment
Numerous studies illustrate the many benefits of parks . Both the National Recreation and Parks Association and
the Trust for Public Land have prepared studies on the economic benefits of parks . In the 2015 study, The
Economic Impacts of Local Parks: An Examination of the Operations and Capital Spending on the United States
Economy, the NRPA reports nearly 140 billion in economic activity and the creation of 1 million jobs in 2013 . In
Measuring the Economic Value of a City Park System , The Trust for Public Land cites seven ways parks bring
value to a city. These include increased property values , increased tourism spending , direct use value , health
benefits , community cohesion , and improved air & water quality.
Options for funding refreshing parks may include the development of a park improvement fee , funding through
typical BFO cycles , or funding through the 10 year capital improvements tax.
ATTACHMENTS
1 . Community Parks Map ( PDF )
2 . Powerpoint presentation ( PDF )
Packet Pg . 149
�- �. -, , „��• .,. ..sue � _:,.-- ,� - ,� .�
ATTACHMENT
c
� .•erg
w
_ ■ � C.
y
c-
s.R fO h
�cWill
Ito
Vine Dr.Pro
re
1 ; �• t of I�Ir
1 ' �lE o _ •i " � �'J
1 _�,Si } • .1 _.il { p, .Yid' ♦ 1 I
Mulberry St. d'hF. Yy
��@ ...'a. Y '�
th
!tom if mG -- �-
•. + - 4 Prospect Rd.
a
c
R
a dill
J
O ■ r r}r
■ , Drake Rd.
�,Nj
E
di Horsetooth Rd.
a
�F.: ��• , •„ � 'rR���yM1'+� ��l 67§ �F � � � • �
IN
Y6 Harmony Rd.
_ - fY -d" ge
1 M,. 2 a�14. `�'1���� 'r�7ke , s • -dayY .-^��..yl tiE ^ hit
OutheastiCOMMUHILy rd1K
CO
oil
w �'J$ • i `` I� • ; ti . c�~ Trilby Rd _ n ► a _
lit
�► r �� y It r�, ,� �_�
ti C' t 1 `a a'TT��ri(3)y^ate•}J» 1,<_ — cs 1, °v4
\. I 1.` � r?i 6 • .•..,' I � _�� Vim.. � - 1 ..� ,«` i
Carpenter Rtl. 3 'gNyr- i xt
• Existing Community Parks
OProposed Community Parks
Existing Neighborhood Parks
Mv
m
Existing and Proposed Parks
m April , 2016 W
City of
Fnrtf nllinc
r Attachment: Community Parks Map (4347 : Refreshing Fort Collins Parks)
Fcity of 6-26- 16
ort Collins
. ,►: _ �. : s-K, . .. - yid - . '� ` � �'•
JJ
a.
75
LL
t • r,
r ATTACHMENT 2
Cn
Cu
Packet Pg . 151
1 �
1 i .
Refreshing Fort Collins Parks
Kurt Friesen , Park Planning & Development Director
3 . 2
Fort of
Questions for Council a.
_
O
U
0
LL
_
• What feedback does Council have regarding the park refresh y
concept ?
• What direction does Council have regarding funding options for
refreshing parks ? _
0
• What feedback does Council have regarding park build out and life
cycle programs ?
_.o
L
0
a
a
E
Ca
a
Packet Pg . 152
_ 1 •
i
LL
1
i . !t y �'ym7 'y ji y .�• • A y�;+� i r• _ ' - _- - - - �..� �.. y. -_ 1M: a► •
f • _ � .' a .��• * r . l � ��� � �� �' r � '� r . . ' � • i Ada . � •`^; ` _' � : \ (! ,•
Ai
A` «r �;k7j�r l :• _ .� r ` 1' r. . , , ' ' - a. � k ; .'r , t � ! �, 'JaI.F . .y , t �� -/ - '
ray- .i
�. •
IZ-
Packet Pg . 153
c
•
' r
a.
l _ i - �►'
Cn
Co
Lo
lk
CL
Ca
Packet
��` I ,� - - �� � * ^ i �ll,j� { • I ICI � ~+� . . � �� � I I^ • � ^ � � Rti •
•
• " �' / ,f
v
J y • •
i f i
.+
v±
. g
3 .2
-..• ,
M It I
Ilk
Y
4,00
ff
Idill
A0 , 1 '� P LL
1 lYr . ; I
I' _ • L•
� v +
tow
Io
! tlR�„e► di s t. gm
�
, III
for
r ' » N
too P tit00
L
y1wOm
- J .
v, ► i> 1 IG A `
Y y
f C. • .O
ffit Q.
it
r ` the If
If,
vp71
, v a .,Y r '1. r 1 r' ` • 1.' `��j �� �y` . �
Packet Pg . 155
3 . 2
I'pw7 - - 701
�w .t • a ' - ! Ma ' { .__
wF7 c yn 1N i iNu 0
a
,0 1 , , A F A �hw ��
a.
_ F "
LL
kil
to 1IN
` � \ \ `
aIs I !' AF4 . .
ti 1 � i'i �w►r►+v �'
FF
I
I x
E
Ca
IkI
Packet Pg . 156
i
1
1 Nllw.�M-.
•
7 •
•
ti«
} r
1 a
a.
s -
y _bwddow
' ' r
LL
Cn
op
log
Ca
Atom
OEM
A + i
y _
■►
yt ►
`+ }
�� �► /
Packet • 158
f
ax
r ` 44444
IV 7
CL
um
gyp. '+'.Y••^ l
Packet)MOO lytop,
Cu
. •
3 . 2
Fort of
Fort Collins Parks are Valued a.
� Y
N
_
O
U
0
LL
0)
_
t
N
0
L
2015 Citizen Survey Results o 0 =
4 0 0
_
L
Q
_.O
Q
L
0
a
" Good " or " Very Good "
ca
� a
Packet Pg . 160
City of
Fort Collins
Three Part Approacha.
75
1 Park Build Out Completing the Park System U.
2 . Park Life Cycle Program Maintaining What We Have
ark Refresh — Adapting to Changing Needs '
.
Cn
CL
CL
f � , I�( �I / ' � �,�r �� l.•P � ' � �� III �^��o-�1 iL_
— - ell
CIO
Packet
6 11
' •
3 . 2
Fort of
Existing Process a.
N
_
O
U
O
LL
_
t
N
O
L
M
_
NEW PARK BUILD PARK MAINTENANCE
O
a�
a�
_
d
N
Elm
Q
++
_.O
Q
L
O
a
a�
E
Cu
a
Packet Pg . 162
3 . 2
Fort ofNNW
� Y
Proposed Process a
N
_
O
U
O
LL
_
t
NEW
O
L
M
PARK • O
IL
BUILDcv
_
d
d
L
Q
_.O
Q
L
O
a
a�
E
ca
a
Packet Pg . 163
3 . 2
Fort of
N
Y
Park Build Out a
N
C
O
2 Community Parks
uad `O
• East Community Park -��. Richards �
"Its Z
• Northeast Community Park '
N
Hill
13 Neighborhood Parks A � �-
No heast M
• Maple Hill Iron Horse Comlaalt„
�ru.R.... x.eui � YiP01
• Trailhead Lind P�
• Bucking Horse Fossil Lake ! tape _ saR BRUSH
'
y Iron
d$ I Canal I
L
Morse �
• Eastridge • Lake Canal E .Z Trailhead a
AITAM PARK
• Interstate • Airport o Airport \ Eastridge O
PARK —
• Richards Lake 0 Huidekooper U TP qw„ 0
q " EMETERY
• Bacon Elementary - Eg
E
Based on 2008 Parks & Recreation Policy Plan 14
ca
Packet Pg , 164
3 . 2
Fort of - ' - • - y
Southeast Community Park d
N
C
-� O
LL
J
`�. ._ m
3 .y
ff
ti
o
to
Ca
a
Packet Pg . 165
• Current Park Projects
Southeast Community Park
y VOOW
r
VOW-
a._
` 1 P y� hqt q.� � •
rV'o 4 i
- - - - - - •.
16
. • 166
3 . 2
f IN
on
Fort Collins - ' - 01
- y
/ \ L
Southeast Community Park d
N
C
O
U
0
o
LL
N
r�
L
IIIIIIII o
O
- - a
a�
E
Ca
a
Packet Pg . 167
Cit
• Current Park Projects
Southeast Community Park • '
.
LL
Cu
Packet
18 -
. • 168
Cit
• Current Park Projects
Southeast Community Parka.
I .
LL
.
Ilk
� 1
IN
l{ }
t
i I + IIII � � li
oil CL
Cu
Packet
•d
19
. g
3 . 2
f on
Fort Collins Current Park 01
- y
/ \ L
Southeast Community Park d
N
_
O
U
_ oAM
LL
L
r` I
l
_
O
M
_
d
i L
Q
_.O
Q
U.
W
3
O
a
a�
E
Ca
� a
Packet Pg . 170
3 . 2
Fort of
Current Park Pr ects a.
01
Y
N
C
O
Maple Hill Neighborhood Park
O
park concept A park concept B park concept C
ZOO
fil
twn
® O
l d
` ...� \�/ V-� Im.+.nh nwVV M.)) )Oi5 ® OYw�Y�•YO0�7l�IS® �
E
V
CU
�I
�1
a
Packet Pg . 171
3 . 2
Fort of
� Y
Neighborhood Park 10 Year Projection a
N
C
O
U
$ 3 , 5007000 0
U.
CD
$ 3 , 000 , 000
N
$ 2 , 500 , 000
$ 2 , 000 , 000
$ 1 , 500 , 000
0
$ 110001000
$ 5001000
■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■
L
2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025 2026 3:
0
a
mAdministration Park Projects — Impact Fee Collections
E
Cu
a
Packet Pg . 172
3 . 2
Fort ofown
Community Park 10 Year Projection a.
� Y
N
C
O
U
$ 910001000 0
0
U.
$ 810001000 C '
t
$ 710001000
$ 610001000
$ 5 , 000 , 000
M
$ 410001000
0
$ 310001000
$ 210001000
L
$ 110001000
$ 0 $
L
2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025 2026 3:
0
a
Park Projects — Impact Fee Collections
E
CU
a
Packet Pg . 173
3 . 2
Fort of
N
Y
Park Build Out a
N
C
O
U
Suggested Solution : U.
• Increase park impact fees . Fee increase evaluation is currently y
underway.
M
M
Cn
O
Or
t y
� y
E
CU
a
Packet Pg . 174
3 . 2
Fort ofNNW
Parks Life Cycle Program a.
75
Y
N
C
Playground before
Replacement or Restoration
o
of Existing Park Elements ._
N
L
Recent Projects
t
• Greenbriar Playground
• Edora Ballfield Lights
• English Ranch Walkway repairs Playground after
• Golden Meadows Tennis Court
• Spring Canyon Bike Park T.
1.
Renovation Phase 1 _ . ;
� 1 � _
a
CU
a
Packet Pg . 175
3 . 2
Fort ofNNW
Parks Life Cycle Program
Y
N
C
O
U
1 , 000 + Acres Life Cycle Components U.
• 6 Community Parks
N
• 42 Neighborhood & Asphalt/ Playgrounds w
Concrete yg
Pocket Parks
• Archery Range Buildings Fields Irrigation
L
Courts Structures
c
�o
L
0
Water a
c
a�
E
ca
• a
Packet Pg . 176
3 . 2
Fort ofNNW
Average Park Age
Y
N
C
O
U
30
O
29 LL
28 Z
L
W
N
27
d
26
M�
W 25 M
}
24
O
23
C
22 d
N
d
L
21 Q
20
COMMUNITY PARK NEIGHBORHOOD PARK POCKET PARK Q
L
O
Note : The three oldest parks in the city, Washington Park , Library Park and City Park are
over 100 years old and not included in the average . E
a
Packet Pg . 177
3 . 2
Fort oflow
Parks Life Cycle Funding a.
Y
N
C
O
U
$ 17000 , 000 1000 0
U.
$ 8007000 800
L
$ 6001000 600
L M
U �
Q �
$ 4001000 400
$ 2001000 200
'o
L
$ 0
N CO �t UM) CO f� CO m O N M 7T UM) (D r� O
O O O O O O O O d
O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O
N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N �+
C
Total Acres Actual Life Cycle Funding E
CU
a
Packet Pg . 178
3 . 2
Fort ofWOMW
N
Y
Life Cycle — 10 Year Projection L
a
N
C
O
$ 4, 500, 000
0
$ 4, 000, 000 U.
$ 3 , 500, 000
N
$ 3 , 000, 000
$ 2 , 500, 000
M
$ 2 , 000, 000
$ 1 , 500, 000
$ 1 , 000, 000
L
$ 500, 000
$ _ o
L
2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025 2026 0
a
■ Community Park needs Neighborhood / Pocket Parks — KFCG Contribution
Includes only current park acreage - no proposed parks included
CU
• a
Packet Pg . 179
City of
Fort Collins
Park Life Cyclea.
Suggested Solution : 0
LL
• Offer - Cycle
Funding :E
� �•� .
Cn
CL
CU
Packet Pg .
.N� . tl � `, y •' \ �1:,-. 'f / !�j"t'}�. . . , y,,, _r � _�'. - e i yfk�� i ' ,�yti4, ,y \ ` , RS i.. �
• M• y M ? e ,
ai►
30
180
City of
Fort Collins
Park Refresh ■Reasons to Update Parks
75
•
- - . - - -
Adapt to . NeedsProvide Equitable Park Experiences City Wide
Connect People With
• •
Replace and Improve Antiquated Infrastructure
K � • w � vsQy ' A. "'iL � t . Sy r � _ I
CU
Packet
- � ' � • 1 � •� L� , - - YY �'t L ''� �= jai, _ � ��. j � �``�� d" '
• � 9i r ;
31 -
' •
City of
Fort Collins
Reasons to Update Parks �
75
- . Pace with Changing TrendsRecreation
•
LL
•N G e,
CO
i �A�` O��e01�♦701e� �� r ♦•��•?'♦'iii00'O?�t0� ' v?'�Y♦ ?7 ' Z": ? S� a* ' .,.'r,",. t9�♦
�' i � •r a♦♦l9, a•a♦e0. � , aea�.:e♦•e♦•�°e♦♦♦°i°� ram°••° • 7i h . ,' " � ' •♦�°i°e♦°•°•♦O
� �99,4t�0,�9g9 r z - �`P.D rPr.ASb!'dO�AO�t°nO�GyA�O�•�♦�i�•±♦�♦oe�♦�♦4; 6♦•�e��esi °♦• �•� F d♦°�Pi°�•°•°•b�
♦ e♦ p ♦•• •♦♦•
� ♦ OR A��6 „ (. i3 L�A„9Gt4F4�,J $0 y�9es�i> PSei•�4A4°A i O-0�O�9�a♦iIGdAO°♦° O°ea°A°6°A�1 .�� :jai •♦♦♦♦••e♦e••♦� •
-�• . lid • y -h ife P;. {. q ci.+.-
':��®R®�w� a� ��a�■tea/ �a/■�aaaa�d��o � � _ , � � _ ^�.. un _ h � ,
—�■/■/a �. ,Ala.a`arl■.aiaal+z®r��=c��c�._ ;. . ,
��a� w/a�■�a w�a/a/a��
www/w/wa -
/a/w/w/a a/ ��ilw arl /w�a�a/� ■ t _ _ _
wow a�a/ =a�■/a�a� n � ;� -
i■/a/f/■
I■/a///■Ir•a/Y- �1 /Marl �rl.rro��lr�a///
■/a/a/a r/a �■ a� a��a�a/a�■r a �/■/a�a ��: ;�i/iiiiiwiiii� . •
/■�a� �■� a� tea/■ ■/ ■/awr . 0 �a/a�a�
ru
Packet
■w4: a/ a/■ �■ ■.a/■/■ ■/■e ■ '/■/ ' i ®wa/aawa■awa�ae ,
�� � a/ i�a . r/ .ra�a�■ ■ a .ate �sl�w���w//■►��..�
■r,, �na�� a �' .r � ��a/aa br' IlvJ c:.i lY Y'-.J �Ja ... �.�.v-..." .-��.
a/t/<I I/Is � •s• ��i���_r•r•��ri� �rr�i�•�•i�s�r�s��s��••i�`��_
.= s
Pickle � ll
• •
City of
Fort Collins
Reasons to Update Parks ■75
ChangingAdapt to - - .
-
LL
.. •. J{e} - - X •xi . . ice +� , .+.�- . � � r
Wit, . f-: j
~. •
Community Gardens
CU
33 -
Packet
' •
City of
Fort Collins
Reasons to Update Parks � �
75
Provide Equitable Park Experiences City Wide r.
LL
INN
01
I ,
x
I _
t - - -
4 " •
Fossil Creek Park Playground Lee Martinez Park Playground E
CU
Packet
34
. g
3 . 2
Fort ofIMF
� Y
Reasons to Update Parks a
N
C
O
Connect People with Nature o
LL
Z
- t/1
MINE
LW
it
� — L
= - %.7- %Jmmter . T . . . . - i .r 'i
in
Y' W lipF IL
q• _
� . • F . O
d
la
a�
a�
a
Packet Pg . 185
City of
Fort Collins
Reasons to Update Parks ■ �
75
Replace and Improve Antiquated infrastructure 0
LL
1 z •
CL
CL
Accessibility
Irrigation Pavements
CU
36
Packet
. • 186
City of
Fort Collins
Park Refresh Processa.
LL
01
INITIAL PARK PHASED
CONCEPTS MASTER PLAN CONSTRUCTION
PHASEI -
PROJECT COMMUNITY PROJECT
Cu
Packet
GOALS INPUT IDENTIFICATION
37 -
' •
3 . 2
Fort oflow
_ Refresh
N
ark
Y
Example d
N
C
O
March 3 & 7 Community Meetings o
.WAWA81 % M
.�
CITY PARK
TOMORROW i L
City Of
� Fort Collins
c
E
CU
a
Packet Pg . 188
Park Refresh Example ■ �
�J 'f ►- "' �, �``'�a°�, III _
4ID_ . Tie¢_ :.�'— - •�._ j t�� :O % � <',� CITY PARK
r' ' ; �-.f " ' ,�r•���;� �„�•`y. roMoaaow
.0 - i a►C i- Parrot
ZAP MY w-
It
/ ��-' i■ \01Q\O�. //A �
/�i �/� �►���- / .�..� "'fir I- TAM�
/ �� � � � / w . r �'� yam__ - _"�� +- U/ f'/� /� � .. � / _'� i • �+^
LJ= Y
♦ Y� ♦ V
1 ,41
1
I
• F a� •
�■
".ram -� •
39
3 . 2
Fort ofBMW
N
Y
I Refresh Estimate by I
N
C
O
U
$ 18 , 000 , 000
O
LL
$ 16 , 000 , 000
Z
$ 14 , 000 , 000
a�
L
$ 12 , 000 , 000
ti
$ 10 , 000 , 000 oil
M
$850005000
O
$65000 , 000
c
m
$450007000
L
Q
$25000 , 000 =
o
Q
$0
City Park Rolland Moore Park Lee Martinez Park Edora Community Park o
a
Approximately 50 Million Dollars Total
E
CU
� a
Packet Pg . 190
3 . 2
Fort of
Park Refresh Funding Options a.
� Y
N
C
O
U
• Development of a Park Improvement Fee
U.
Funding through Typical BFO Cycles
N
• 10 year Capital Improvements Tax
M
O
Z r r/
400/4 tooh /V
Cn
�l o r sib jQ
• 41
4 f� ,�
�` ' � jl� t►Is�tl r a
1 • • • t
CU
- a
Packet Pg . 191
3 . 2
Fort oflow
Parks are a Good Investment/ \ L
d
N
C
O
T U T 0
U.
x X National Recreation for P u B L I
and Park Association LAN D
L
CONSERVING LhL% d FOR r' rt-� l' I i �
ti
140 billion in economic Increase in property value
activity that resulted in nearly Increase in tourism spending o
1 million US jobs in 2013 . Direct use value
• Health benefits
L
• Community cohesion
• Improved air & water quality
0
a
1 - 2015 The Economic Impacts of Local Parks : An Examination of the Operations and Capital Spending on the United States Economy
a>
2 - 2003 Measuring the Economic Value of a City Park System — Trust for Public Land E
ca
- a
Packet Pg . 192
3 . 2
Fort of
Questions for Council a.
_
O
U
0
LL
• What feedback does Council have regarding the park refresh
N
concept ?
• What direction does Council have regarding funding options for M
refreshing parks ? "
_
0
• What feedback does Council have regarding park build out and life
cycle programs ? L
_.o
L
0
a
a
E
Ca
- a
Packet Pg . 193