HomeMy WebLinkAboutAgenda - Mail Packet - 10/21/2014 - Council Finance Committee & Ura Finance Committee Agenda - October 20, 2014Council Finance Committee & URA Finance Committee
Agenda Planning Calendar 2014
RVSD 10/8/14 mnb
Oct. 20 TOPIC TIME WHO
CFC
Long Term Financial Plan 60 min A. Gavaldon
Comprehensive Fee Study 30 min J. Ping-Small
Annual Budget Adjustment Ordinance 15 min L. Pollack
Woodward Rebate Appropriation Review 15 min J. Ping-Small
URA
Nov. 17 TOPIC TIME WHO
CFC
New Financial Operating Policy 45 min J. Voss
Economic Health Policy 30 min J. Voss
J. Birks
URA Multiple URA Budget Items 30 min T. Leeson
Dec. 15 TOPIC TIME WHO
CFC
Review of prior Revenue Diversification Discussions 45 min J. Ping-Small
URA
Jan. 19 TOPIC TIME WHO
CFC
URA
Future Council Finance Committee Topics:
• Review Special Improvement Districts
Future URA Committee Topics:
• No Topics in Queue
Finance Administration
215 N. Mason
2nd Floor
PO Box 580
Fort Collins, CO 80522
970.221.6788
970.221.6782 - fax
fcgov.com
AGENDA
Council Finance & Audit Committee
October 20, 2014
10:00 a.m. to Noon
CIC Room – City Hall
Approval of the Minutes from the September 15, 2014 meeting
1. Long Term Financial Plan 60 minutes A. Gavaldon
2. Comprehensive Fee Study 30 minutes J. Ping-Small
3. Annual Budget Adjustment Ordinance 15 minutes L. Pollack
4. Woodward Rebate Appropriate Review 15 minutes J. Ping-Small
Finance Administration
215 N. Mason
2nd Floor
PO Box 580
Fort Collins, CO 80522
970.221.6788
970.221.6782 - fax
fcgov.com
Council Audit & Finance Committee
Minutes
9/15/14
10:00 a.m. to 11:00 p.m.
CIC Room
Council Attendees: Ross Cunniff, Bob Overbeck, Mayor Karen Weitkunat
Staff: Mike Beckstead, Megan Bolin, Karen Cumbo, Mike DeKock,
Kelly DiMartino, Chris Donegon, Andres Gavaldon, Amy
Sharkey, Larry Schneider, John Voss, Katie Wiggett
Others: Danielle Nater, Feeders Supply; Kevin Jones, Chamber
Approval of the Minutes
Ross Cunniff moved to approve the minutes from the August 18 meeting. Bob Overbeck seconded the
motion. Minutes approved unanimously.
Community Financial Report
Mike Beckstead explained that Financial Services has historically provided Council with a monthly
“General Fund Finance Report.” The current report is primarily focused on General Fund Revenue with
only a high level expenditure summary and does not include any other data on City operations beyond
General Fund activity.
Financial Services has developed a Financial Report that is comprehensive of revenue and expenditures
across the entire City. Mike walked through a draft of the new report with Council Finance. The new
report is organized by Governmental Activities and Enterprise (Utility) activities and includes revenue,
expenditures and capital plus a recap of various economic activity indicators. With this report, Staff
aims to provide Council and the community with a more holistic view of finances across the City. Staff
proposes publishing the new report on a quarterly basis.
Bob Overbeck noted that it would have been helpful to have sample information in the comments
section, so Council Finance could see what type of information would be included there. Mike said that
Staff would use the comments boxes to explain what was driving changes in each fund. Bob said that he
liked that the new report showed all the funds.
The Mayor said that the change to the proposed new report seemed appropriate. She also noted that
the comments in the comment boxes would probably have the most significant impact on how the
report was received.
Bob Overbeck suggested that another page be added showing the current year compared to the
previous year to show trends. The Mayor said that such a page might be more appropriate on an annual
2
report rather than a quarterly report. Staff will look into the suggestion.
Council Finance supports moving forward with the new report as the “Quarterly Financial Report.”
Year End Appropriations
Mike noted that the annual Year End Budget Adjustment Ordinance is scheduled to go to Council on October
21. The Budget Adjustment Ordinance covers appropriations of 2014 unanticipated revenues or the
appropriation of unassigned reserves to fund unanticipated expenditures. Staff is bringing the three most
significant of those expenditures to Council Finance for review.
First, Staff is asking for $800K to be appropriated for Snow Removal. The budget for Snow Removal is based
on the historical average annual costs. Due to the heavy snows in 2013 and early 2014, the entire snow
removal budget of $1/3M for 2014 has been spent.
As is anticipated in heavy snow years, additional funding will be requested within the Budget Adjustment
Ordinance using existing Transportation Fund reserves. The Transportation Fund ended 2013 with a balance
of $15M of which $5.1M is available for additional costs such as this. If the fourth quarter is light on snow,
these funds will return to the Transportation Fund.
The Mayor asked if Staff is buying deicer now. Larry Schneider answered yes; Staff stocks up in the summer
to avoid shortage in the winter. Staff is currently prepared for October and November. Bob Overbeck asked
how much the cost of deicer has gone up since last year. Larry answered about 5-6%. The City is locked in
to a contract with a supplier and has a very good storage space which allows us to store up at the best times
for cost.
Second, Staff is asking for $1,850K from reserves in the Benefits Fund for medical claims. Medical claims
grew approximately 6% a year from 2009 through 2012. In 2013, claims increased 9% over 2012. In looking
at the first eight months of 2014, the growth in medical claims is trending toward another increase of 9% or
more, compared to 2013. Claims expenditures are expected to exceed budget by $1.3M; additional funds
are also needed to cover unanticipated increases in other employee benefits. If the additional
appropriations requested are not expended, these funds will return to the Benefits Fund at year end.
Mike noted that one way Staff is working to alleviate the growing cost in medical claims is the creation of a
Wellness Clinic which is anticipated to slow the growth of claims. Amy Sharkey explained that staff hoped to
get 50% participation from Staff in the first year of the wellness clinic and then see growth in participation
from there. The Wellness Clinic will be available to all employees and their dependents.
The Mayor asked if Staff has considered raising the budgeted amount for benefits in the 2015-2016 budget,
to ensure that we don’t have the same problem two years from now. Mike answered that Staff is looking
into the implications for 15-16 and should have that information before the budget goes to Council. Kelly
DiMartino noted that the base offer for 15-16 has risen from 13-14’s budget.
Last, Staff is asking for $855K for Risk Management to cover Workers Compensation claims and Property
Liability claims. Workers Compensation claims and Property Liability claims are budgeted based on the
average claims over the past several years, and claims vary significantly from year to year, making them
difficult to forecast. Mike gave several drivers for the increase in Property and Liability claims including hail
damage. The Self Insurance Fund ended 2013 with a $3.6M fund balance of which $2.8M is surplus.
3
Additional funding of approximately $855K will be requested from the Self Insurance Fund and, if not
expended, will be returned at year end.
Mike noted that Staff has taken large steps toward fostering a culture of safety in the City and is aiming for a
20-30% reduction in claims by 2017 due to safety efforts.
Council Finance supports the appropriation for snow removal, benefits, and Risk Management.
Status of Auditor Findings
Mike DeKock presented the status of auditor findings from the 2013 financial and compliance audit
which were presented by the City’s auditor’s McGladrey, LLP at the July 2014 Finance Committee
Meeting. In connection with the City’s annual audit, the City receives a report on the financial
statements, internal control and compliance over financial reporting and internal control and
compliance over Federal Awards.
Each report received by the City included an unmodified or “clean” opinion which is the highest rating
the auditors are permitted to provide in accordance with professional standards. This result
demonstrates that the City’s financial statements are free of material misstatement and appropriate
oversight is in place to maintain compliance over laws, regulations, contracts, grant agreements and
other matters.
The report on the financial statements did not include any material misstatements, deficiencies or
findings. However, the auditors did report three audit misstatements in a separate document issued to
the City Council. Each of the misstatements was due to improper cut-off of revenue recognition and the
auditors determined that they were not significant.
The Report on Internal Control and Compliance over Federal Awards included one repeat finding
relating to the timely reconciliation of CDBG program income. Mike explained that this is a previous
finding from the 2012 audit and was still unresolved because the solution proposed by management in
2013 was deemed inadequate. In 2014, the Social Sustainability and Accounting Departments met with
HUD to better understand the compliance requirements and developed a new process for reconciling
program income for all City Federal programs. The auditors have accepted this response and the issue is
deemed to be resolved as of March 31, 2014.
April 19, 2014
COUNCIL FINANCE COMMITTEE
AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY
Staff: Andres Gavaldon / Strategic Finance Manager
Date: October 20, 2014
SUBJECT FOR DISCUSSION:
Update of Long Term Financial Planning project
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY:
Council has requested a Long Term Financial Plan (LTFP). Council Finance Committee (CFC)
has reviewed and supported the general project scope for LTFP in a prior meeting, but also
requested a review during the process to confirm assumptions. Staff is seeking feedback on
input on major variables within the model, as well as confirmation of issues and scenarios
council would like to review in the final report.
GENERAL DIRECTION SOUGHT AND SPECIFIC QUESTIONS TO BE ANSWERED:
1. Feedback on assumptions used for forecasting major revenue and expense items
2. Input on scenarios and issues that should be modeled
BACKGROUND/DISCUSSION:
The City is an incredibly complex organization with numerous accounts, funds, and departments
that combine into the financials we are attempting to forecast in LTFP. In this presentation, staff
has isolated the main variables that drive the financials, and would like to discuss the
assumptions and forecast formulas for these variables.
The model used for the LTFP is capable of forecasting specific scenarios that may occur in the
future such as 5% decrease in revenues, maximizing bonding capacity, or KFCG tax expiration.
Staff has proposed possible scenarios, but is also seeking input on additional issues of interest to
the council they would like to see modeled in the final report.
ATTACHMENTS:
1. Long Term Financial Planning Process Update 20 Oct 2014
1
Long Term Financial Planning
Process Update
20 Oct 2014
2
Direction Requested
Council agreement on key variables and
scenarios being modeled in
Long Term Financial Planning (LTFP).
LTFP is meant to be used as a directional
tool to highlight potential issues.
Not a forecast.
3
Intent & Scope
LTFP is meant to be used as a directional tool to
highlight potential issues.
Not a forecast.
• Provide base case 10 year view of revenue and expenditures based on key
assumptions
• Provide directional understanding of the gaps between various revenue and
expenditure assumptions
• Provide ability to evaluate the impact of various scenarios from the base case
• Expiration of certain taxes
• Significant increases in select cost elements
• Impact of a significant increase in debt to achieve objectives
• Implications of fully funding 10 year capital plan (once developed)
4
Funds Discretely Modeled & Included in Total City View:
General Fund
KFCG
Natural Areas
Transportation
Transit
Cultural Services & Museum
Recreation & Golf
Natural Areas
LTFP – Scope Review
Costs Included in Total City View:
Capital Expansion
General Improvement District
Neighborhood Parkland
Conservation Trust
Cemeteries
Perpetual Care
Community Development Block Grant
Street Oversizing
Debt Service
Capital Leasing
Capital Projects
URA – No College
URA – Prospect South
URA – Debt Service
Funds Not Included: Utilities
Charges Included in Total City View:
Benefits Fund
Equipment Fund
Self Insurance Fund
Data & Communications Fund
5
LTFP – Scope Review cont.
Revenue Detail Being Analyzed:
City organization chart of accounts has 533 active revenue accounts
533 revenue accounts are summarized into 32 revenue line items that
are each forecasted individually
Majority of $265M 2013 revenue is driven by following
accounts :
• Sales & Use Tax
• Capital Grants / Contributions
• Property Taxes
• Proceeds of Debt Issuance
• Contributions & Donations
• Cultural, Parks, Recreation, Natural
Areas Fees
• Shared Revenues (County & State
Distribution – transportation, fuel,
etc.)
7 summary accounts make up 80% of total revenue.
6
LTFP – Scope Review cont.
Expense Detail Being Analyzed:
City organization chart of accounts has 346 active expense accounts
346 expense accounts are summarized into 39 expense line items that
are each forecasted individually
Majority of 2013 $234M expenses is driven by following
accounts:
• Salaries & Wages
• Governmental Services
• Benefits
• Repair & Maintenance
• Infrastructure
• Professional & Technical
• Vehicles & Equipment
• Land
• Construction Services
• Debt Service
10 summary accounts make up ~80% of total expenses.
7
Historical Data:
13 years of history at the individual account level
30 years of Sales and Use tax revenue
LTFP – Scope Review continued
Transfers & Intra-fund Transactions:
Fund-to-fund transfers are isolated enabling consolidated city-wide analysis
to be viewed with, or without transfer data.
Unique Data Sets:
Data sets created for ad hoc analysis:
Capital Improvement Plans
Debt Service projections
FTE – Headcount.
Forecast Time Horizon: 10 years
Timeline: February 2015 completion target date for council work session
Results: Incorporated into Strategic Planning Cycle
8
Correlation Matrix - Revenue
Revenue Summary Account Correlation Forecast Formula
Resulting Baseline
Forecast Rate
Sales & Use Tax Sales& Use Tax strongly correlated with
building material sales (.942), but building
sub group only accounts for <7% of sales.
Use Tax very erratic and low correlation with
any data sets.
Sales Tax forecasted using last 15 years average growth rate
(normalized for changing tax rates) equates to avg 3.3%.
Use Tax projected to grow conservatively at 15 yr historical
growth rate of 3.57%.
3.30%
Capital Grants / Contributions
(includes MAX)
No correlation useful for predictions. Default assumption is to grow base amount at CPI excluding
large extraordinary grants. 2.80%
Property Taxes Highly correlates to Population and Inflation
Index (.965)
Utilize Population and Inflation Index. Population is driven by
Advanced Planning assumption of 1.9% growth (based on 10 yr
history). Inflation is tied to CPI 2.8%. 4.65%
Proceeds of Debt Issuance None. Dependent on projects. Scenario forecasting dependent on debt issuance - case by case
basis.
Scenario based
Cultural, Parks, Recreation,
Natural Area Fees
Low correlation with existing data sets. Default rate based on 14 year historical rate of 3%
Possible to tie a portion of forecast formula to participation
rates. 3.00%
Shared Revenues, County &
State distribution (auto
owners tax, highway users,
open space, etc.)
Low correlation with existing data sets. Default rate based on 14 year historical rate of 0.7%
0.70%
3.23%.
9
Correlation Matrix- Expenses
Expenses Summary Account Correlation Forecast Formula
Resulting Baseline
Forecast Rate
Salaries & Wages Highly correlates with Population and
Inflation Index (.937)
Currently using Population and Inflation Index to forecast at
4.65%.
Alternative is to use scenarios to forecast. 4.65%
Government Services (Poudre
Fire Authority, Larimer
County, etc.)
90% PFA RAF formula driven Custom formula that takes into account Revenue Allocation
Formula (including escalation through 2018) and then ties to
combination of Sales and Property Tax revenue growth. 3.90%
Benefits Moderate correlation with Population and
Personal Income, but recent escalation in
healthcare costs reduce viability.
60% based on wages (retirement, social security, medicare)
40% driven by healthcare and assumed 8% yearly rate
increases 6.00%
Repair and Maintenance
(street, bridge, vehicle, etc.)
KFCG impact to street and bridge repair render
historical rates unreliable.
Majority of individual accounts averaged 4% growth.
4.00%
Infrastructure (construction
contracts)
No correlation to data sets. Driven by large
capital projects; Police building, Max, etc.
Utilize Capital Improvement Plan data set when assembled.
Placeholder formula will utilize average amount for 2000-2014
of $13.9M increasing at CPI 2.8% 2.80%
Professional and Technical Moderate correction with population, but
changes to chart of accounts and project
driven expenses make trend analysis
unreliable.
Utilize Population and CPI Index.
4.65%
10
Example Analysis
11
Scenarios
Macro View of Revenue & Expenses:
5%, 10%, 20% Favorable
5%, 10%, 20% Unfavorable
Combinations – ex. 10% favorable revenue growth with only 5%
increase in expense growth
Revenue Sources at Risk:
KFCG 2020 expire
Streets 2015 expire
BOB 2015 expire
Natural Areas 2019 expire
Capital Projects & Debt:
City Hall – ex. $60M in 2025
Police Training Facility – ex. $10M
in 2016
Debt Policy Max
Expense Uncertainty:
Healthcare – ex. 10 years of
12% growth per year
Headcount assumptions – ex.
25 FTE added per year
Climate Action Plan spending –
ex. $50M expenditure in next
50 years
12
Example Scenario Analysis
13
Next Steps
Service Area visits:
Accumulate Area Capital Improvement Plans
Verify expense driver methodology with budget owners
Specific fund issue verification
Scenarios:
Futures committee review
Programming into model
Analysis:
Data review and verification
Issue identification and highlights
October 20, 2014
COUNCIL FINANCE COMMITTEE
AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY
Staff: Jessica Ping-Small, Revenue and Project Manager
Mike Beckstead, Chief Financial Officer
Date: October 20, 2014
SUBJECT FOR DISCUSSION: 2014 Comprehensive Fee Study
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
In 2014, staff engaged Raftelis Financial Consultants to perform a comprehensive benchmark
comparison of the City’s Building Permit, Development Review and Capital Improvement fees.
The scope of the study includes a review of the aforementioned fees for residential, commercial
and industrial as they compare to multiple benchmark cities and Larimer County.
The scope of the fee study focuses primarily on the fees as they exist today. The study does not
analyze the methodology for how the fees are derived. The purpose of the study is to educate on
how the City of Fort Collins compares to other jurisdictions on the Front Range and to serve as a
tool for making informed decisions regarding fees moving forward.
GENERAL DIRECTION SOUGHT AND SPECIFIC QUESTIONS TO BE ANSWERED
Based on the Fee Study and forthcoming Revenue Diversification discussion in December, staff
is seeking direction on next steps for 2015.
BACKGROUND/DISCUSSION
History
As part of the ongoing Revenue Diversification discussion, staff committed to lead an
encompassing comparative fee analysis in 2014. In the past 5 years, staff has reviewed and
updated the Development Review Fees, Building Permit Fees and non-utility Capital
Improvement Fees. In addition, opportunities for different fees such as a Street Maintenance Fee
and a Park Maintenance Fee have been reviewed with the Council Finance Committee. The
attached draft fee report continues the discussion on revenue diversification.
Scope of Study
The scope of the Fee Study includes a comparative analysis of fees associated with the “cost to
build” in Fort Collins and surrounding communities. The fees include Building Permit,
Development Review and Capital Improvement Fees.
October 20, 2014
*Refer to study for complete list by category
Thirteen benchmark cities plus Larimer County were selected based on proximity to Fort Collins
and historical benchmark data. The communities include:
• Arvada • Longmont
• Boulder • Louisville
• Broomfield • Loveland
• Fort Collins • Thornton
• Greeley • Timnath
• Johnstown • Westminster
• Lakewood • Windsor
• Larimer County
The following sample scenarios were chosen for the study:
Criteria
Single
Family
Residential
Detached
Commercial
Office
Commercial
Retail
Industrial
Warehouse
Mixed-Use
Multifamily Commercial
Valuation $300,000 $1,400,000 $550,000 $895,000 $3,000,000
Building
Size, sq. ft 2,000 7,700 6,100 19,000 24,000 14,000
Lot Size,
sq. ft. 8,600 28,174 14,000 133,000 14,000
Water
Meter Size 0.75-inch 1-inch 0.75-inch 0.75-inch 2-inch 0.75-inch
No. of
Dwelling
Units
1 NA NA NA 18 NA
Tap
Equivalent 1.0 1.7 1.0 1.0 10.8 1.0
October 20, 2014
Although, Development Review fees are included in the study, they are not included in the
graphical comparisons. Over 50 unique cost centers have been identified by the consultant,
making an apples to apples comparison challenging. The fees by jurisdiction are included in
Table 2.1 of the report.
Please note that the fee study is in draft form, however, no significant changes are expected and
the data has been reviewed thoroughly. Once the study is finalized, an updated copy will be
provided to City Council.
Summary of Study
The results of the study including the corresponding graphs are located in Section 1.2 of the fee
study and included in the presentation. Below is a high level table of the overall Fort Collins
ranking by scenario.
*Includes Building Fees (Permit, Plan Review, Use Tax), Utility and Non-Utility Capital Expansion Fees
Based on the fee study, Fort Collins ranked low for residential development. The Utility Capital
Improvement fees are significantly lower than most benchmark cities. Fort Collins Utility Fees
ranked 13
th
out of 15
Fort Collins ranked on the higher end of both commercial scenarios. The Fort Collins fees are in
in the top 3 for both Building fees and Non-Utility Capital Improvement Fees.
It is important to note that Use Tax is included in all scenarios. The data for Building Permit,
Plan Review and Use Tax is broken down in Appendix B-F of the fee report.
Conclusions
The purpose of the fee study is to provide updated information to City Council and provide a tool
for future revenue related decisions. Opportunities uncovered through the fee study are
dependent on the growth strategy. There are areas where fees could be introduced, increased or
decreased but again this is dependent on the growth strategy.
Staff will be presenting a refresher of the completed revenue diversification analysis to Council
Finance in December. Based on the presentation related to revenue diversification and the fee
study, staff will be seeking direction for next steps in 2015.
October 20, 2014
ATTACHMENTS
Power Point Presentation
Draft Fee Study
1
2014 Comparative Fee Study
Council Finance Committee
October 20, 2014
2
4 Year Work Plan
2012-Q2 2013 Q3 2013 Q4 2013 Q2-Q4 2014 Q4 2014 2015
Revenue Diversification
Analyze
Street
Maintenance
Fee and Park
Maintenance
Fee
Done
Complete
Comprehensive
Fee Study
Done
Council Decision
on Fee vs. Tax
for Street
Maintenance
Done
Next Steps
Per CFC
Direction
Analyze
City’s Revenue
Diversity &
Draft Policy
Done
Next steps dependent on CFC direction.
Review
Revenue
Diversification
Options
3
Fee Study – Scope
• Provide an updated comparative analysis of
fees associated with the “cost to build”
• Study does not include analysis of fee
methodology
– Development Review & Building Permit fees
updated in 2011
– Capital Expansion Fees every 3-5 years
• Fees Included in study:
– Building Permit Fees
– Development Review Fees
– Capital Improvement Fees – Utility and Non-
Utility
4
Fee Study Summary
Types of Fees Included Detail*
Building Fees Permit, Plan Review, Use
Tax
Development Review Fees Dev. Review, Final Plan,
Minor and Major
Amendment, etc.
Non-Utility Capital Improvement
Fees
General Gov’t,
Neighborhood and
Community Parks, Police,
Fire, etc.
Utility Capital Improvement Fees Water, Wastewater,
Stormwater
*Refer to study for complete list by category
5
Fee Study – Scope
• Benchmark data – Study includes 14
municipalities plus Larimer County
Types of development scenarios
Criteria
Single
Family
Residential
Detached
Commercial
Office
Commercial
Retail
Industrial
Warehouse
Mixed-Use
Multifamily Commercial
Valuation $300,000 $1,400,000 $550,000 $895,000 $3,000,000
Building
Size, sq. ft
2,000 7,700 6,100 19,000 24,000 14,000
Lot Size,
sq. ft. 8,600 28,174 14,000 133,000 14,000
Water Meter
Size 0.75-inch 1-inch 0.75-inch 0.75-inch 2-inch 0.75-inch
No. of
Dwelling
Units
1 NA NA NA 18 NA
Tap
Equivalent
1.0 1.7 1.0 1.0 10.8 1.0
6
Fee Study Summary
Fort Collins ranks high for commercial and low for residential.
Development Type* Overall Ranking
1st
= Highest Fees
15th
= Lowest Fees
Single Family Residential Detached 12th
Commercial office 2nd
Commercial retail 1st
Multi-family/Commercial mixed use 8th
Industrial Warehouse 4th
*Includes Building Fees (Permit, Plan Review, Use Tax), Utility
and Non-Utility Capital Expansion Fees
• Development Review Fees are NOT included above -
difficult to compare graphically (Table 2.1 in study)
7
Fee Study Summary - Residential
Fort Collins ranks 12th – lower Utility fees the driver for ranking.
$0 $10,000 $20,000 $30,000 $40,000 $50,000 $60,000
Larimer County
Windsor
Johnstown
Fort Collins
Lakewood
Arvada
Westminster
Thornton
Longmont
Timnath
Broomfield
Louisville
Loveland
Greeley
Boulder
Building Fees Non-Utility Fees Utility Fees
8
Fee Study Summary – Commercial Office
Fort Collins ranks 2nd
– Building and Non-Utility Fees driving ranking.
Larimer County
Johnstown
Westminster
Windsor
Broomfield
Lakewood
Greeley
Louisville
Arvada
Timnath
Longmont
Thornton
Loveland
Fort Collins
Boulder
Building Fees Non-Utility Fees Utility Fees
9
Fee Study Summary – Commercial Retail
Fort Collins ranks 1st – Non-Utility Impact Fees driving ranking.
$0 $20,000 $40,000 $60,000 $80,000 $100,000
Johnstown
Lakewood
Westminster
Timnath
Windsor
Broomfield
Arvada
Louisville
Thornton
Longmont
Loveland
Boulder
Larimer County
Greeley
Fort Collins
Building Fees Non-Utility Fees Utility Fees
10
Fee Study Summary – Mixed Use
Fort Collins ranks 8th.
$0 $100,000 $200,000 $300,000 $400,000 $500,000 $600,000 $700,000
Larimer County
Johnstown
Lakewood
Windsor
Arvada
Longmont
Westminster
Fort Collins
Greeley
Timnath
Loveland
Boulder
Thornton
Louisville
Broomfield
Building Fees Non-Utility Fees Utility Fees
11
Fee Study Summary – Industrial Warehouse
Fort Collins ranks 4th
– Utility and Non-Utility Fees major drivers.
$0 $50,000 $100,000 $150,000 $200,000 $250,000 $300,000 $350,000
Johnstown
Lakewood
Westminster
Timnath
Arvada
Broomfield
Louisville
Thornton
Larimer County
Loveland
Windsor
Fort Collins
Greeley
Longmont
Boulder
Building Fees Non-Utility Fees Utility Fees
12
Fee Study – Observations
• Ranked low for residential
– Utility Capital Improvement fees significantly lower
than most benchmark cities
– Fort Collins Utility Fees ranked 13th
out of 15
• Ranked high for most commercial scenarios
– Fort Collins fees on the higher end (top 3) for both
Building fees and Non-Utility Capital Improvement
Fees
• Opportunities dependent on growth strategy
– Areas where fees could be introduced, increased or
decreased
13
Next Steps
• Review Revenue Diversification options
w/CFC in December
• Based on discussion, determine next steps
for 2015
City of Fort Collins
Survey of Development
Review and Capital
Expansion Fees
Revised Draft Report III
September 30, 2014
Report Prepared By:
12835 E Arapahoe Rd. Tower II, Suite 600
Centennial, CO 80112-6726
(720) 638 - 3791
Table of Contents
City of Fort Collins
Survey of Development Review and
Capital Expansion Fees Draft Report III
i
1. Executive Summary 1-1
1.1. Introduction ................................................................................................................... 1-1
1.2. Survey Summary .......................................................................................................... 1-2
1.3. Fee Analysis.................................................................................................................. 1-9
1.3.1. Building Related Fees ................................................................................... 1-9
1.3.2. Utility Capital Expansion Fees ...................................................................... 1-9
1.3.3. Non-Utility Capital Expansion Fees............................................................. 1-10
2. Development Review Fees Survey 2-1
2.1. Introduction ................................................................................................................... 2-1
2.2. Building Related Fees................................................................................................... 2-1
2.3. Development Review Fees ........................................................................................... 2-3
3. Capital Expansion Fees Survey 3-1
3.1. Introduction ................................................................................................................... 3-1
3.2. Utility Capital Expansion Fees ...................................................................................... 3-1
3.2.1. Water............................................................................................................. 3-1
3.2.1.1. Treated Water..................................................................................... 3-1
3.2.1.2. Raw Water .......................................................................................... 3-2
3.2.2. Wastewater ................................................................................................... 3-2
3.2.3. Stormwater .................................................................................................... 3-2
3.2.4. Summary of Utility Capital Expansion Fees .................................................. 3-2
3.3. Non-Utility Capital Expansion Fees .............................................................................. 3-5
3.3.1. Parks, Open Space, Trails and Recreation................................................... 3-5
3.3.2. Fire ................................................................................................................ 3-6
3.3.3. General Government..................................................................................... 3-6
3.3.4. Police............................................................................................................. 3-6
3.3.5. Schools.......................................................................................................... 3-6
3.3.6. Library............................................................................................................ 3-6
3.3.7. Human Services ............................................................................................ 3-6
3.3.8. Street Oversizing........................................................................................... 3-6
3.3.9. Air Quality...................................................................................................... 3-7
3.3.10. Museum......................................................................................................... 3-7
3.3.11. Summary of Non-Utility Capital Expansion Fees .......................................... 3-7
3.4. Combined Utility and Non-Utility Capital Expansion Fees............................................ 3-9
List of Tables
Table 1-1 Summary of Sample Criteria by Development Type ......................................... 1-2
Table 1-2 Comparison of Total Building and Capital Expansion Fees
by Development Type......................................................................................... 1-3
Table 1-3 Comparison of City of Fort Collins Fees by Development Type ........................ 1-9
Table 2-1 Development Review Fee Survey ...................................................................... 2-4
Table 2-2 Calculation Sheet for Transportation Development Review Fee ...................... 2-7
Table of Contents
City of Fort Collins
Survey of Development Review and
Capital Expansion Fees Draft Report III
ii
List of Figures
Figure 1.1 Comparison of Total Building and Capital Expansion Fees for Single Family
Residential Detached
Figure 1.2 Comparison of Total Building and Capital Expansion Fees for Office
Figure 1.3 Comparison of Total Building and Capital Expansion Fees for Retail
Figure 1.4 Comparison of Total Building and Capital Expansion Fees for Warehouse
Figure 1.5 Comparison of Total Building and Capital Expansion Fees for Mixed Use
Figure 2.1 Comparison of Building Related Fees for Single Family Residential Detached
Figure 3.1 Comparison of Utility Capital Expansion Fees for Single Family Residential
Detached
Figure 3.2 Comparison of Non-Utility Capital Expansion Fees for Single Family Residential
Detached
Figure 3.3 Comparison of Combined Utility and Non-Utility Capital Expansion Fees for
Single Family Residential Detached
Appendices
A. Summary of Building Related Fees and Capital Expansion Fees for Sample Residential
and Commercial Buildings
B. Single Family Residential Detached Building Fees Survey
C. Office Building Fees Survey
D. Retail Building Fees Survey
E. Warehouse Building Fees Survey
F. Mixed Use Building Fees Survey
G. Single Family Residential Detached Utility Capital Expansion Fees Survey
H. Office Utility Capital Expansion Fees Survey
I. Retail Utility Capital Expansion Fees Survey
J. Warehouse Building Utility Capital Expansion Fees Survey
K. Mixed Use Utility Capital Expansion Fees Survey
L. Single Family Residential Detached Non-Utility Capital Expansion Fees Survey
M. Office Non-Utility Capital Expansion Fees Survey
N. Retail Non-Utility Capital Expansion Fees Survey
O. Warehouse Building Non-Utility Capital Expansion Fees Survey
P. Mixed Use Non-Utility Capital Expansion Fees Survey
City of Fort Collins
Survey of Development Review and
Capital Expansion Fees Draft Report III
1-1
1
1. Executive Summary
1.1. Introduction
The City of Fort Collins, Colorado (City) provides a full range of governmental services
to a growing population of nearly 150,000. These services include water, wastewater,
stormwater and electric utilities and a full complement of municipal government
functions.
The City charges development review fees to recover the costs associated with providing
development-related services. Additionally, they charge capital expansion fees to
proportionately recover the capital costs associated with providing system capacity to
serve new development.
The City authorized Raftelis Financial Consultants (RFC) to compare its development
review and capital expansion fees with those of other northern Front Range Colorado
entities. The City selected the following 15 entities to include in this survey:
Arvada Longmont
Boulder Louisville
Broomfield Loveland
Fort Collins Thornton
Greeley Timnath
Johnstown Westminster
Lakewood Windsor
Larimer County
This report and its appendices summarize the findings of RFC’s survey.
At the City’s request, RFC surveyed a sample of the following types of development:
Single family residential detached
Commercial Office
Commercial Retail
Industrial Warehouse
Multifamily/ Commercial Mixed-use
Section 1
Executive Summary
City of Fort Collins
Survey of Development Review and
Capital Expansion Fees Draft Report III
1-2
Table 1-1 shows the criteria used for the sample for each type of development.
Table 1-1
Summary of Sample Criteria
By Development Type
Criteria
Single
Family
Residential
Detached
Commercial
Office
Commercial
Retail
Industrial
Warehouse
Mixed-Use
Multifamily Commercial
Valuation $300,000 $1,400,000 $550,000 $895,000 $3,000,000
Building
Size, sq. ft 2,000 7,700 6,100 19,000 24,000 14,000
Lot Size,
sq. ft. 8,600 28,174 14,000 133,000 14,000
Water
Meter Size 0.75-inch 1-inch 0.75-inch 0.75-inch 2-inch 0.75-inch
No. of
Dwelling
Units
1 NA NA NA 18 NA
Tap
Equivalent 1.0 1.7 1.0 1.0 10.8 1.0
1.2. Survey Summary
This development review fee survey includes building related fees, utility capital
expansion fees and non-utility capital expansion fees for five types of development.
Table 1-2 summarizes the total fee amount for each type of development. The tables in
Appendix A provide the supporting detail for this summary.
Section 1
Executive Summary
City of Fort Collins
Survey of Development Review and
Capital Expansion Fees Draft Report III
1-3
Table 1-2
Comparison of Total Building and Capital Expansion Fees
By Development Type
Criteria
Single
Family
Residential
Detached
Commercial
Office
Commercial
Retail
Industrial
Warehouse
Multifamily /
Commercial
Mixed Use
Arvada $35,012 $103,642 $52,597 $54,408 $354,502
Boulder 50,604 189,042 76,513 298,326 445,202
Broomfield 44,726 84,519 52,153 53,792 587,127
Fort Collins 32,433 139,030 85,687 97,801 393,388
Greeley 48,514 95,033 80,959 124,351 424,703
Johnstown 31,540 70,409 38,925 38,731 274,595
Lakewood 32,822 86,964 41,303 42,683 297,354
Larimer County 10,754 58,572 80,039 68,883 141,892
Longmont 38,393 113,497 48,093 119,094 358,176
Louisville 46,207 101,360 53,408 53,523 544,170
Loveland 47,919 120,228 69,278 70,375 441,471
Thornton 36,319 118,382 59,088 60,623 475.354
Timnath 39,751 111,863 45,628 47,266 436,200
Westminster 35,076 81,230 41,732 43,095 385,585
Windsor 27,064 81,712 50,578 75,180 310,664
Fort Collins
Survey Rank 12 2 1 4 8
Section 1
Executive Summary
City of Fort Collins
Survey of Development Review and
Capital Expansion Fees Draft Report III
1-4
Figure 1.1 graphically compares the total fee amounts shown in Table 1-2 for single
family residential detached development type for each of the surveyed entities. The
City’s total fees rank 12
th
highest of the 15 entities.
Figure 1.1 – Comparison of Total Building and Capital Expansion Fees
for Single Family Residential Detached Building
(Value of $300,000)
Section 1
Executive Summary
City of Fort Collins
Survey of Development Review and
Capital Expansion Fees Draft Report III
1-5
Figure 1.2 graphically compares the total fee amounts shown in Table 1-2 for office
building development type for each of the surveyed entities. The City’s total fees rank
2
nd
highest of the 15 entities.
Figure 1.2 – Comparison of Total Building and Capital Expansion Fees
for Office Building
(Value of $1,400,000)
Section 1
Executive Summary
City of Fort Collins
Survey of Development Review and
Capital Expansion Fees Draft Report III
1-6
Figure 1.3 graphically compares the total fee amounts shown in Table 1-2 for retail
building development type for each of the surveyed entities. The City’s total fees rank
highest of the 15 entities.
Figure 1.3 – Comparison of Total Building and Capital Expansion Fees
for Retail Building
(Value of $550,000)
Section 1
Executive Summary
City of Fort Collins
Survey of Development Review and
Capital Expansion Fees Draft Report III
1-7
Figure 1.4 graphically compares the total fee amounts shown in Table 1-2 for warehouse
building development type for each of the surveyed entities. The City’s total fees rank 4th
highest of the 15 entities.
Figure 1.4 – Comparison of Total Building and Capital Expansion Fees
for Warehouse Building
(Value of $895,000)
Section 1
Executive Summary
City of Fort Collins
Survey of Development Review and
Capital Expansion Fees Draft Report III
1-8
Figure 1.5 graphically compares the total fee amounts shown in Table 1-2 for mixed use
building development type for each of the surveyed entities. The City’s total fees rank 8th
highest of the 15 entities.
Figure 1.5 – Comparison of Total Building and Capital Expansion Fees
for Mixed Use Building
(Value of $3,000,000)
Section 1
Executive Summary
City of Fort Collins
Survey of Development Review and
Capital Expansion Fees Draft Report III
1-9
1.3. Fee Analysis
Table 1-3 compares the City’s fees and the survey ranking by development type. The
highest fee has a ranking of one and the lowest fee has a ranking of 15.
Table 1-3
Comparison of City of Fort Collins
Fees by Development Type
Single
Family
Residential
Detached
Commercial
Office
Commercial
Retail
Industrial
Warehouse
Multifamily /
Commercial
Mixed Use
Building Related Fees
Fee $9,904 $41,479 $17,417 $27,508 $85,079
Ranking 3 3 3 3 3
Utility Capital Expansion Fees
Fee $13,086 $58,035 $21,410 $40,881 $96,671
Ranking 13 5 10 4 12
Non-Utility Capital Expansion Fees
Fee $9,443 39,516 46,860 29,412 211,638
Ranking 2 3 3 4 2
Total Fees
Fee $32,433 $139,030 85,687 97,801 393,388
Ranking 12 2 1 4 8
1.3.1. Building Related Fees
All surveyed entities assess building related fees. These fees include building permit and
plan review fees and use taxes. These fees are based on the building valuation which
includes profit, labor and materials. The City’s building related fees for the five sample
types of development are ranked in top fifth of surveyed customers.
1.3.2. Utility Capital Expansion Fees
All surveyed entities assess utility capital expansion fees. These fees are for water,
wastewater, and stormwater utilities. The ranking for the City’s utility capital expansion
fees for the five sample types of development range from 4
th
for the industrial warehouse
type to 13
th
for the single family residential detached type.
Section 1
Executive Summary
City of Fort Collins
Survey of Development Review and
Capital Expansion Fees Draft Report III
1-10
1.3.3. Non-Utility Capital Expansion Fees
Our survey identified about 17 different service areas with non-utility capital expansion
fees. The City assesses fees for eight of these services areas, including schools and
county roads for which they collect fees for the benefit of two school districts and
Larimer County roads. The City’s service areas without a capital expansion fee include
air quality, golf, human services, library, museum, open space, regional parks, recreation
and trails. The ranking for the City’s utility non-utility capital expansion fees for the five
sample types of development are ranked in top fifth of surveyed customers.
City of Fort Collins
Survey of Development Review and
Capital Expansion Fees Draft Report III
2-1
3
2. Development Review Fees Survey
2.1. Introduction
Development review fees recover the costs associated with providing development-
related services. These fees include building permit and plan review and a wide range of
fees related to specific development activities.
2.2. Building Related Fees
Building related fees include building permit fees, plan review fees, and use tax. These
fees are based on the building valuation which includes profit, labor and materials.
Appendices B through F compare building related fees for single family residential
detached, commercial office, commercial retail, industrial warehouse, and multifamily /
commercial mixed use developments, respectively.
Appendix B compares the development of sample building related fees for a single
family residential detached type with a value of $300,000 for each of the surveyed
entities. Figure 2.1 graphically compares the building related fees for this residential
building for each of the surveyed entities. The City’s building fees rank 3
rd
highest of 15
entities in this comparison.
Section 2
Development Review Fees Survey
City of Fort Collins
Survey of Development Review and
Capital Expansion Fees Draft Report III
2-2
Figure 2.1 – Comparison of Building Related Fees for
Single Family Residential Detached Building
(Value of $300,000)
Appendix C shows the development of sample building related fees for a commercial
office building with a value of $1,400,000 for each of the surveyed entities. The City’s
building fees rank 2
nd
highest of 15 entities in this comparison.
Appendix D shows the development of sample building related fees for a commercial
retail building with a value of $550,000 for each of the surveyed entities. The City’s
building fees rank 3
rd
highest of 15 entities in this comparison.
Appendix E shows the development of sample building related fees for an industrial
warehouse building with a value of $895,000 for each of the surveyed entities. The
City’s building fees rank 4
th
highest of 15 entities in this comparison.
Section 2
Development Review Fees Survey
City of Fort Collins
Survey of Development Review and
Capital Expansion Fees Draft Report III
2-3
Appendix F shows the development of sample building related fees for a multifamily /
commercial mixed use building with a value of $3,000,000 for each of the surveyed
entities. The City’s building fees rank 2
nd
highest of 15 entities in this comparison.
2.3. Development Review Fees
Development review fees recover a broad range of development-related costs. RFC
identified about 50 different cost centers that these fees recover. These cost centers may
be described differently by each entity, making direct comparisons difficult. Table 2-1
summarizes development review fees for the surveyed entities. Table 2-2 is the
calculation sheet for the transportation development review fee.
Line No. Fee Description Arvada Boulder Broomfield Fort Collins Greeley Lakewood
Larimer
County Longmont Louisville Thornton Westminster
1 Addition of permitted use $500
2 Annexation petition and map $1,200 $6,580 $1,188 $750 + $5/acre $73 per acre
$1000 +
$20/acre $300
3 Appeal $300 $200 $540
4 Basic Development Review $200
5 Code compliance
6 Violation beyond 1st violation $100
7 Violation beyond 2nd violation $200
8 Violation beyond 3rd violation $300
9 Repeat offender - summons $300
10 Blight hearing $300
11 Comprehensive plan amendment $500-$1000 $250 - $650
12 Conceptual review $200 - $500
13 Conditional use permit $1,000
14 Design review
15 Infill $250
16 Major $500
17 Minor $150
18 Development agreement $500
19 Development plan inspection fee
20 Per single family $75
21
Per multi-family, commercial or
industrial $100
22 Development review
23 Water $53
24 Wastewater $53
25 Stormwater $177
26 Energy code $84
27 Engineering review
28 CDOT Access $630
29 Stormwater plan and report $526
30 Transportation $526
31 Utility plan $526
32 Extension of final approval $566
33 Final plan
34 Without subdivision plat $500 + $150
(a)
$1,000
35 With subdivision plat $500 + $150
(a)
$1,000
36 Floodplain variance $300 $1,400 $200
37 Height exception $600 $1,760 $100
38 Location and extent review $800
39 Major amendment $3,206
40 Minor amendment $100-$300 $2,100 $192
41 Mechanical permit $65
42 Non-conforming use review $1,389 $300
43 Out of City utility request $500
44 Outline development plan $1,000
Table 2-1
Development Review Fee Survey
Line No. Fee Description Arvada Boulder Broomfield Fort Collins Greeley Lakewood
Larimer
County Longmont Louisville Thornton Westminster
Table 2-1
Development Review Fee Survey
45 Outline development plan amendment $1,000
46 Overall development plan $1,599
47 Concept review
$400 * sq root
of acres
48 Technical review
$400 * sq root
of acres
49 Permit
50 Electrical $90
20% of bldg
permit
~7% of bldg
permit
51 Plumbing $94 $7,341
10% of bldg
permit
~3.5% of bldg
permit
52 Water, irrigation & fire line permit $127
10% of bldg
permit
~3.5% of bldg
permit
53 Revocable encroachment $200
54 Floodplain $30-$400 $35-$700 $0 $100 $395
55 Floodway use $675
56 Foundation only $220 $200
57 Grading $28
58 Fencing/retaining wall $81 $55
59 Plan review - new structure
60 New structure $1,050
61 Existing structures $30
62 Planned unit development plan
63 Final $250 - $650 $2,000 $750 $2,590
64 Preliminary
$2500 +
$10/lot $750 $2,590
65 Major plan amendments $1,500 $1,715
66 Minor plan amendments $1,000 $515
67 Plat
68 Final $550 - $650 $975 $500 $965
69 Minor subdivision $250 $250 $1,775
70 Preliminary $700
(a)
$200 - $500 $975 $600 $1,240
71 Preliminary development plan $700
(a)
72 Project development plan
73 Without subdivision plat, per unit $800
(a)
$3,887
74 With subdivision plat, per unit $800
(a)
$5,879
Line No. Fee Description Arvada Boulder Broomfield Fort Collins Greeley Lakewood
Larimer
County Longmont Louisville Thornton Westminster
Table 2-1
Development Review Fee Survey
80 Site plan $800
(a)
$250 - $650 $500 (b) $500
81 Site plan amendment $300
82 Sketch plan review $600 $800
83 Street name change $1,580 $5 $100
84 Subdivision agreement/final plat $2,625
85 Transportation Development Review
86 Overall Development Plan $500
87 Project Development Plan $160
88 Final Development Plan $1,000
89 Annexation $250
90 Annexation, per acre $20
91 Minor Amendment $250
92 Major Amendment $2,500
93 Rezoning Petition $200
94 Modification to Land Use Code $200
95 Wireless Telcom Equipment $65
96 Road Projects, per acre $500
97 Vacations of Easements $400
98 Dedications of Easements and ROW $250
99 Vacations of ROW $800
100 Urban renewal site plan $250 - $650
101 Use permitted by special review $500
102 Vacation
103 ROW or easement $200 $5 $200 $675 $200 $250 $1,785 $300
104 Plat $100 $100
105 Required public hearing $700 $100
106 Administrative review $200
107 Variance request - fence
108 Fence $100
109 Zoning $500
110 Other $250 $125 $150 - $300 $135 - $270 $100
111 Vested right
112 Early $1,000 $1,540
113 Statutory $500 $250 - $650
114 Wildfire review $200
115 Wireless
116 New freestanding facility $2,200 $2,440 $600 $1,300
117 Administrative review only $600 $50
118 Zoning
119 Verification letter $25 - $50 $25 $25
120 Compliance review $85 $50
cc: Christie White, Engineering
Development Review Engineering
*** This fee does not include the cost of filing fees. Filing
fees shall be determined at the time of final document
submittal and will be required prior to filing.
These fees do not includethecostof filingfeesfortherecordingof
the DevelopmentAgreement.WhenaDevelopmentAgreementor
Amendment Agreement is entered into the Developer shalJ be
responsibleforthecostofrecordingthedocument. Saidfilingfees
shall be calculated and provided when tbe signed document is
returned to the Cityforsignaturesandfiling.
Name (please print):
Signature: _
Telephone:
Foot Notes:
When a development project involves a cbange of use for a
building, the charge per square foot sball apply to the portion of
the overall building size for whicb the change of use is proposed,
provided that the new use generatesmoretrafficthan the existing
use, as determined by the current Institute of Transportation
Engineers Trip Generation.If the new use does not generate more
traffic than the existing use then the charge per square foot for
shall apply only to the net additionalbuildingsize (if any).
City/State/ Zip: _
Telephone: Fax: _
Certification:
By signing this permit I acknowledge that J am acting with
the knowledge, consent, and authority of the owners of the
property (including all owners having legal or equitable
interest in the real property, as defined in Section 1-2 of the
City Code; and including common areas legally connected
to or associated with the property which is the subject of
this application) without whose consent and authority the
requested action could not lawfully be accomplished.
Pursuant to said authority, r hereby permit City officials to
enter upon the property for purposes of inspection.
Contact _
Street address: _
Applicants/ Consultants Firm Name: _
City/State/Zip: _
Telephone: Fax: _
Street address: _
General Information:
Owners Name(s): _
Total owed for PDP -----
2012 form
Reduction for affordable housing - a copy of the City letter certifying/ authorizing the
affordablehousingshallbe provided with this application. Amount of reduction to be
applied__
If this fee amountequalsorexceeds565.000 then the CityManagershallhavetheability
to reducethe feeamount.
The maximum fee for any residential ONLY project shall be $500 per residential unit.
This check should be used to verify the fee amount (does not apply to mixed-use
developments). PDP fee shall be the lesser of this amount or the above calculated
amount. # of residentialunitsX $500 = _
Total of above amounts
If this feeamountexceeds$30,000 then thefeeamountshall be adjustedwiththe
followingformula: $30,000 + y, (the amount over 30,000 J
Commercial, Industrial, Retail, and/or Non residential
building square footage $0.25 per square foot
City of Fort Collins
Survey of Development Review and
Capital Expansion Fees Draft Report III
3-1
4
3. Capital Expansion Fees Survey
3.1. Introduction
Capital expansion fees proportionately recover the costs associated with the capital and
financing cost of system capacity serving new development. The City capital expansion
fees include utility and non-utility fees.
The “capital expansion fee” for the surveyed entities may have different nomenclature
(e.g., tap fee, license fee, system development fee, connection fee, and capital investment
fee). RFC assumes that each of these fees, regardless of nomenclature, has the same
purpose and for simplicity uniformly refers to them as capital expansion fees in this
report.
3.2. Utility Capital Expansion Fees
The City’s capital expansion fees include the following utility areas:
Water Electric Capital Expansion
Wastewater Electric Building Site
Stormwater
Electric capital expansion fees are not included in this survey. Only three of the surveyed
entities (Fort Collins, Loveland, and Longmont) have electric utilities and associated
electric capital expansion fees.
3.2.1. Water
The water capital expansion fee includes treated and raw water fees. These fees are
separately discussed in this section.
3.2.1.1. Treated Water
The City’s treated water capital expansion fee recovers the growth-related capital
expansion costs of water supply, storage, transmission, treatment and distribution
facilities. The residential fee varies with the number of dwelling units and the lot area.
The nonresidential fee varies with the size of the water meter.
All of the surveyed utilities have treated water capital expansion fees. There are some
variances in the treated water fee structure. For example, multifamily fees may be based
on water meter size or the number of dwelling units. Single family fees may be a single
fee, or be based on meter size, or be a combination of meter size and lot size.
Section 3
Capital Expansion Fees Survey
City of Fort Collins
Survey of Development Review and
Capital Expansion Fees Draft Report III
3-2
Commercial fees are generally based on meter size or the number of equivalent
residential units. The water fee for entities purchasing water from Denver Water will
include Denver Water’s fee as well as the entity’s water fee.
3.2.1.2. Raw Water
The City’s raw water capital expansion fee recovers the growth-related capital expansion
costs of raw water. The fee is based on the amount of raw water requirement, measured
in acre-feet. The raw water requirement is satisfied by: (1) water rights (stock)
acceptable to the City, (2) City water certificates, or (3) Cash in-lieu-of water right
payment.
All of the surveyed utilities have similar raw water policies to the City’s. Some of the
surveyed utilities have a specific water resource capital expansion fee, while other
utilities will accept water rights stock or certificates or cash in-lieu-of water payments.
RFC estimated the fee for the entities that do not have a specific raw water fee.
3.2.2. Wastewater
The City’s wastewater capital expansion fee recovers the growth-related capital
expansion costs of wastewater collection, transmission, treatment, and disposal facilities.
The residential fee varies with number of dwelling units. The nonresidential fee varies
with the size of the water meter and the strength of wastewater discharge. RFC’s survey
indicates the City’s structure is typical of wastewater fee structures.
All of the surveyed utilities have wastewater capital expansion fees. The wastewater fee
for entities using the Metro Wastewater Reclamation District (MWRD) facilities for
wastewater transmission and treatment will include MWRD’s fee and the entity’s fee.
3.2.3. Stormwater
The City’s stormwater capital expansion fee recovers the growth-related capital
expansion costs of stormwater facilities. The fee applies when a parcel of land is
developed and creates an impervious surface of more than 350 sq. ft. The fee is based on
the gross area of the development and the runoff coefficient (percent of impervious area).
RFC’s survey indicates that seven of the 15 entities surveyed have stormwater capital
expansion fees. These fees are all based on the amount of impervious area.
3.2.4. Summary of Utility Capital Expansion Fees
Appendices G through K compare sample utility capital expansion fees for single family
residential attached, commercial office, commercial retail, industrial warehouse, and
multifamily / commercial mixed use developments, respectively.
Section 3
Capital Expansion Fees Survey
City of Fort Collins
Survey of Development Review and
Capital Expansion Fees Draft Report III
3-3
Appendix G shows the development of sample utility capital expansion fees for a single
family residential detached home with a ¾-inch water tap, an irrigable area of 5,100
square feet (sq. ft.), and a total lot size of 8,600 sq. ft. for each of the surveyed entities.
Figure 3.1 graphically compares the utility capital expansion fees for single family
residential detached building of each of the surveyed entities. The City’s utility capital
expansion fees rank 13
th
highest of 15 entities in this comparison.
Figure 3.1 – Comparison of Utility Capital Expansion Fees for
Single Family Residential Detached
Appendix H shows the development of sample utility capital expansion fees for a
commercial office building with a 1-inch water tap and a total lot size of 28,174 sq. ft. for
each of the surveyed entities. The City’s utility capital expansion fees rank 5
th
highest of
15 entities in this comparison.
Appendix I shows the development of sample utility capital expansion fees for a
commercial retail building with a ¾-inch water tap and a total lot size of 14,000 sq. ft. for
each of the surveyed entities. The City’s utility capital expansion fees rank 10
th
highest
of 15 entities in this comparison.
Section 3
Capital Expansion Fees Survey
City of Fort Collins
Survey of Development Review and
Capital Expansion Fees Draft Report III
3-4
Appendix J shows the development of sample utility capital expansion fees for an
industrial warehouse building with a ¾-inch water tap and a total lot size of 133,000 sq.
ft. for each of the surveyed entities. The City’s utility capital expansion fees rank 4
th
highest of 15 entities in this comparison.
Appendix K shows the development of sample utility capital expansion fees for a
multifamily / commercial mixed use building with a 2-inch residential water tap, a ¾-
inch commercial water tap and a total lot size of 14,000 sq. ft. for each of the surveyed
entities. The City’s utility capital expansion fees rank 12
th
highest of 15 entities in this
comparison.
Section 3
Capital Expansion Fees Survey
City of Fort Collins
Survey of Development Review and
Capital Expansion Fees Draft Report III
3-5
3.3. Non-Utility Capital Expansion Fees
RFC identified 17 service areas of non-utility capital expansion fees in its survey. The
following tabulation shows the service areas (shaded) that are applicable to each surveyed
entity.
Air Quality
County Roads
Fire
General
Government
Golf
Human
Services
Library
Museum
Open Space
Parks -
Community
Parks -
Neighborhood
Parks -
Regional
Police
Recreation
Trails
Schools
Street
Oversizing
Arvada X
Boulder
Broomfield
Fort Collins
Greeley
Johnstown
Lakewood
Larimer County
Longmont
Louisville
Loveland
Thornton
Timnath
Westminster
Windsor
3.3.1. Parks, Open Space, Trails and Recreation
This area includes the following items: community parks, neighborhood parks, regional
parks, trails, open space, recreational facilities and golf. Most surveyed entities list these
areas separately. However, RFC has combined these areas into one category to simplify
the report and charts.
RFC’s survey indicates that 10 of the 15 entities surveyed have these types of fees. The
City has community parks and neighborhood parks capital expansion fees. Typical of
this type of fee, the City’s fees are only applicable to residential development and are
based on the above-grade building square footage and the number of dwelling units. The
Section 3
Capital Expansion Fees Survey
City of Fort Collins
Survey of Development Review and
Capital Expansion Fees Draft Report III
3-6
above-grade building square footage of the dwelling is used to determine the range of
fees to be assessed.
3.3.2. Fire
RFC’s survey indicates that six of the 15 entities surveyed have fire services capital
expansion fees. The fee structure of all these entities, including the City, is based on the
number of residential dwelling units and the building size of the nonresidential
development.
3.3.3. General Government
RFC’s survey indicates that seven of the 15 entities surveyed have general government
capital expansion fees. The fee structure of all these entities, including the City, is based
on the number of residential dwelling units and the building size of the nonresidential
development.
3.3.4. Police
RFC’s survey indicates that six of the 15 entities surveyed have police capital expansion
fees. The fee structure of all these entities, including the City, is based on the number of
residential dwelling units and the building size of the nonresidential development.
3.3.5. Schools
RFC’s survey indicates that seven of the 15 entities surveyed have schools capital
expansion fees. The City collects capital expansion fees on behalf of the Poudre and
Thompson School Districts as part of an inter-governmental agreement. Both fees are
based on the number of residential dwelling units.
3.3.6. Library
RFC’s survey indicates that four of the 15 entities surveyed have library capital
expansion fees. This fee is applied to residential developments only and is based on the
number of residential dwelling units. The City does not have a library capital expansion
fee.
3.3.7. Human Services
RFC’s survey indicates that one of the 15 entities surveyed has a human services capital
expansion fee. This fee is applied to residential developments only and is based on the
number of residential dwelling units. The City does not have a human services capital
expansion fee.
3.3.8. Street Oversizing
RFC’s survey indicates that eight of the 15 entities surveyed have street capital expansion
fees. The City’s residential street oversizing fee is based on the number of residential
units and the use type of dwelling (e.g. apartments, townhomes, condominiums, and
Section 3
Capital Expansion Fees Survey
City of Fort Collins
Survey of Development Review and
Capital Expansion Fees Draft Report III
3-7
single family detached). The nonresidential street oversizing fee is based on the size of
the building as well as the number of weekday trips, trip adjustment factor and the cost
per unit of trip. Additionally, the City collects the regional road fee on behalf of Larimer
County
3.3.9. Air Quality
RFC’s survey indicates that one of the 15 entities surveyed has an air quality capital
expansion fee. This fee is applied to residential developments only and is based on the
number of residential dwelling units. The City does not have an air quality capital
expansion fee.
3.3.10. Museum
RFC’s survey indicates that one of the 15 entities surveyed has a museum capital
expansion fee. This fee is applied to residential developments only and is based on the
number of residential dwelling units. The City does not have a museum capital
expansion fee.
3.3.11. Summary of Non-Utility Capital Expansion Fees
Appendices L through P compare sample utility capital expansion fees for single family
residential attached, commercial office, commercial retail, industrial warehouse, and
multifamily / commercial mixed use developments, respectively.
Appendix L shows the development of sample non-utility capital expansion fees for a
single family residential detached home with total above-grade building area of 2,000 sq.
ft. and three bedrooms. Figure 3.2 graphically compares the non-utility capital expansion
fees for single family residential detached of each of the surveyed entities. The City’s
non-utility capital expansion fees ranks 2
nd
highest of 15 entities in this comparison.
Section 3
Capital Expansion Fees Survey
City of Fort Collins
Survey of Development Review and
Capital Expansion Fees Draft Report III
3-8
Figure 3.2 Comparison of Non-Utility Capital Expansion Fees for
Single Family Residential Detached
Section 3
Capital Expansion Fees Survey
City of Fort Collins
Survey of Development Review and
Capital Expansion Fees Draft Report III
3-9
Appendix M shows the development of sample non-utility capital expansion fees for a
commercial office building with total above-grade building area of 7,700 sq. ft. for each
of the surveyed entities. The City’s utility capital expansion fees rank 3
rd
highest of 15
entities in this comparison.
Appendix N shows the development of sample non-utility capital expansion fees for a
commercial retail building with total above-grade building area of 6,100 sq. ft. for each
of the surveyed entities. The City’s utility capital expansion fees rank 3
rd
highest of 15
entities in this comparison.
Appendix O shows the development of sample utility capital expansion fees for an
industrial warehouse building with a total above-grade building area of 133,000 sq. ft. for
each of the surveyed entities. The City’s utility capital expansion fees rank 4
th
highest of
15 entities in this comparison.
Appendix P shows the development of sample utility capital expansion fees for a
multifamily / commercial mixed use building with 18 dwelling units and total above-
grade commercial building area of 14,000 sq. ft. for each of the surveyed entities. The
City’s utility capital expansion fees rank 2
nd
highest of 15 entities in this comparison.
3.4. Combined Utility and Non-Utility Capital Expansion Fees
Figure 3.3 compares the detached single family residential combined capital expansion
fees for the surveyed utilities. The City’s combined utility and non-utility capital
expansion fees, including fees that the City collects on behalf of the Poudre and
Thompson School Districts and Larimer County (roads), rank 13
th
highest of 15 entities
in this comparison. Without these pass-through fees, the City capital expansion fees
ranks 13
th
highest.
Section 3
Capital Expansion Fees Survey
City of Fort Collins
Survey of Development Review and
Capital Expansion Fees Draft Report III
3-10
Figure 3.3 – Comparison of Combined Utility and Non-Utility
Capital Expansion Fees for
Residential Single Family Detached
City of Fort Collins
Appendix A
Summary of Building Related
Fees and Capital Expansion
Fees for Sample Residential
and Commercial Buildings
September 30, 2014
Report Prepared By:
12835 E Arapahoe Rd. Tower II, Suite 600
Centennial, CO 80112-6726
(720) 638 - 3791
Table A-1
Scenario 1:
Building Type: Single Family Detached
Building Size: 2,000 sq. ft.
Lot Size: 8,600 sq. ft.
Building Valuation: $300,000
Water tap size: 3/4"
Arvada Boulder Broomfield Fort Collins Greeley Johnstown Lakewood
Larimer
County Longmont Louisville Loveland Thornton Timnath Westminster Windsor
BUILDING RELATED FEES
Building Permit $2,339 $2,249 $2,114 $2,180 $2,114 $2,114 $1,845 $2,044 $2,431 $2,200 $2,114 $1,983 $2,114 $1,764 $1,837
Plan Review 1,521 562 1,374 1,049 1,163 634 1,199 1,022 1,215 1,430 1,374 1,289 1,374 1,147 1,194
Sales & Use Tax 5,190 6,540 6,225 6,675 4,671 5,400 5,250 900 6,113 6,450 5,400 6,750 5,400 5,775 6,000
Total Buiilding Fees $9,050 $9,351 $9,713 $9,904 $7,947 $8,148 $8,294 $3,966 $9,758 $10,080 $8,888 $10,021 $8,888 $8,686 $9,031
Ranking 7 6 5 3 14 13 12 15 4 1 9 2 9 11 8
UTILITY CAPITAL EXPANSION FEES
Water $18,345 $25,031 $22,454 $8,672 $28,943 $9,200 $17,968 $13,066 $25,900 $22,995 $20,735 $25,777 $20,836 $6,725
Sewer 5,539 4,473 12,559 3,090 5,600 8,189 6,560 6,830 4,500 2,410 5,563 4,500 5,554 3,700
Stormwater 7,210 1,324 325 400 789 517 632
Total Utility Capital Expansion Fees $23,884 $36,714 $35,013 $13,086 $34,868 $17,389 $24,528 $400 $20,685 $30,400 $25,922 $26,298 $30,277 $26,390 $11,057
Ranking 10 1 2 13 3 12 9 15 11 4 8 7 5 6 14
NON-UTILITY CAPITAL EXPANSION FEES
Air Quality $250
Fire $209 $383 $275 $100 $678
General Government 280 455 1,143 1,121 $604 968 $384
Golf 722
Human Services 149
Library 459 220 475 627
Museum 505
Open Space 778
Parks - Community $1,484 3,147 1,520 1,783 500 669 4,758 3,085 $1,204
Parks - Neighborhood 1,793 1,104 3,562
Parks - Regional 701
Parks & Open Space 1,112
Parks & Trails 2,664
Police 295 192 133 429 881 202
Recreational 1,759 1,546
School - Land 594 750 1,710 1,382
School - Weld County SD
Street Oversizing 3,112 2,085 1,849 3,208 1,099 225 2,170 2,210
Trails 319 489
Total Non-Utility CEP $2,078 $4,539 $0 $7,455 $5,699 $6,003 $0 $6,388 $7,950 $5,727 $13,109 $0 $586 $0 $6,976
Grand Total Fees $35,012 $50,604 $44,726 $30,445 $48,514 $31,540 $32,822 $10,754 $38,393 $46,207 $47,919 $36,319 $39,751 $35,076 $27,064
School CEP Collected by Fort Collins
Larimer County Transportation Expansion $278
School - Poudre SD $1,710
School - Thompson SD $1,382
Grand Total Fees Collected by Entity
Located in Poudre SD $35,012 $50,604 $44,726 $32,433 $48,514 $31,540 $32,822 $10,754 $38,393 $46,207 $47,919 $36,319 $39,751 $35,076 $27,064
Ranking 10 1 5 12 2 13 11 15 7 4 3 8 6 9 14
Located in Thompson SD $35,012 $50,604 $44,726 $32,105 $48,514 $31,540 $32,822 $10,754 $38,393 $46,207 $47,919 $36,319 $39,751 $35,076 $27,064
Ranking 10 1 5 12 2 13 11 15 7 4 3 8 6 9 14
Table A-2
Scenario 2:
Building Type: Commercial Office
Building Size: 7,700 sq. ft.
Lot Size: 28,174 sq. ft.
Building Valuation: $1,400,000
Water Tap Size: 1"
Arvada Boulder Broomfield Fort Collins Greeley Johnstown Lakewood
Larimer
County Longmont Louisville Loveland Thornton Timnath Westminster Windsor
BUILDING RELATED FEES
Building Permit $7,820 $7,519 $7,069 $6,972 $7,069 $7,069 $6,045 $6,544 $8,129 $7,600 $7,069 $6,438 $7,069 $5,719 $5,955
Plan Review 5,083 1,880 4,595 3,357 3,888 2,121 3,929 3,272 4,064 4,940 4,595 4,184 4,595 3,717 3,871
Sales & Use Tax 24,220 30,520 29,050 31,150 21,798 25,200 24,500 4,200 28,525 30,100 25,200 31,500 25,200 26,950 28,000
Total Buiilding Fees $37,124 $39,919 $40,713 $41,479 $32,755 $34,389 $34,474 $14,016 $40,718 $42,640 $36,863 $42,122 $36,863 $36,387 $37,826
Ranking 8 6 5 3 14 13 12 15 4 1 9 2 9 11 7
UTILITY CAPITAL EXPANSION FEES
Water $44,750 $68,669 $22,456 $38,550 $17,700 $15,467 $27,670 $0 $32,270 $46,200 $20,521 $51,228 $63,750 $35,421 $10,895
Sewer 21,768 26,785 21,350 15,440 9,400 6,000 24,320 - 14,670 7,900 18,850 25,032 11,250 9,422 5,994
Stormwater - 46,431 - 4,045 2,029 - - 4,508 2,941 - 1,648 - - - 4,143
Total Utility Capital Expansion Fees $66,518 $141,885 $43,806 $58,035 $29,129 $21,467 $51,990 $4,508 $49,881 $54,100 $41,019 $76,260 $75,000 $44,843 $21,032
Ranking 4 1 10 5 12 13 7 15 8 6 11 2 3 9 14
NON-UTILITY CAPITAL EXPANSION FEES
Air Quality
Fire $4,466 $2,187 $5,429 $2,310
General Government 1,540 4,281 $4,235 3,088 $2,849 3,234
Golf $2,590
Human Services
Larimer Co. Transportation Expansion 3,557
Library
Museum
Open Space
Parks - Community
Parks - Neighborhood
Parks - Regional
Parks & Open Space $500
Parks & Trails
Police 1,232 1,232 1,540 693 3,003
Recreational
School - Land
School - Poudre SD
School - Thompson SD
School - Weld County SD
Street Oversizing 28,259 26,180 9,625 $40,048 17,220 1,771 33,799 $22,854
Total Non-Utility CEF - 7,238 - 39,516 33,149 14,553 500 40,048 22,898 4,620 42,346 - - - 22,854
Ranking 11 8 11 3 4 7 10 2 5 9 1 11 11 11 6
Grand Total Fees $103,642 $189,042 $84,519 $139,030 $95,033 $70,409 $86,964 $58,572 $113,497 $101,360 $120,228 $118,382 $111,863 $81,230 $81,712
Ranking 7 1 11 2 9 14 10 15 5 8 3 4 6 13 12
Table A-3
Scenario 3:
Building Type: Commercial Retail
Building Size: 6,100 sq. ft.
Lot Size: 14,000 sq. ft.
Building Valuation: $550,000
Water Tap Size: 3/4"
Arvada Boulder Broomfield Fort Collins Greeley Johnstown Lakewood
Larimer
County Longmont Louisville Loveland Thornton Timnath Westminster Windsor
BUILDING RELATED FEES
Building Permit $3,842 $3,700 $3,471 $3,496 $3,471 $3,471 $3,045 $3,345 $3,992 $4,250 $3,471 $3,255 $3,471 $2,882 $3,001
Plan Review 2,497 925 2,256 1,683 1,909 1,041 1,979 1,672 1,996 2,763 2,256 2,116 2,256 1,873 1,950
Sales & Use Tax 9,515 11,990 11,413 12,238 8,564 9,900 9,625 1,650 11,206 11,825 9,900 12,375 9,900 10,588 11,000
Total Buiilding Fees $15,854 $16,614 $17,140 $17,417 $13,944 $14,413 $14,649 $6,667 $17,194 $18,838 $15,628 $17,746 $15,628 $15,342 $15,951
Ranking 8 6 5 3 14 13 12 15 4 1 9 2 9 11 7
UTILITY CAPITAL EXPANSION FEES
Water $26,850 $21,941 $22,454 $12,850 $10,600 $9,200 $16,030 $0 $19,350 $25,900 $7,164 $30,773 $25,500 $20,836 $6,725
Sewer 9,893 8,786 12,559 6,550 5,600 3,600 10,124 - 8,800 4,400 5,770 10,569 4,500 5,554 3,700
Stormwater - 23,072 - 2,010 1,008 - - 2,240 1,462 - 1,648 - - - 2,059
Total Utility Capital Expansion Fees $36,743 $53,799 $35,013 $21,410 $17,208 $12,800 $26,154 $2,240 $29,612 $30,300 $14,582 $41,342 $30,000 $26,390 $12,484
Ranking 3 1 4 10 11 13 9 15 7 5 12 2 6 8 14
NON-UTILITY CAPITAL EXPANSION FEES
Air Quality
Fire $2,318 $1,732 $4,301 $1,830
General Government 854 3,392 2,684 $1,647 2,562
Golf $1,287
Human Services
Larimer Co. Transportation Expansion 3,672
Library
Museum
Open Space
Parks - Community
Parks - Neighborhood
Parks - Regional
Parks & Open Space $500
Parks & Trails
Police 2,928 976 1,220 1,403 2,379
Recreational
School - Land
School - Poudre SD
School Thompson SD
School - Weld County SD
Street Oversizing 37,088 44,286 7,625 $71,132 2,623 32,297 22,143
Trails
Total Non-Utility CEF $0 $6,100 $0 $46,860 $49,807 $11,712 $500 $71,132 $1,287 $4,270 $39,068 $0 $0 $0 $22,143
Ranking 11 7 11 3 2 6 10 1 9 8 4 11 11 11 5
Grand Total Fees $52,597 $76,513 $52,153 $85,687 $80,959 $38,925 $41,303 $80,039 $48,093 $53,408 $69,278 $59,088 $45,628 $41,732 $50,578
Ranking 8 4 9 1 2 15 14 3 11 7 5 6 12 13 10
Table A-4
Scenario 4:
Building Type: Industrial Warehouse
Building Square Footage: 19,000 sq. ft.
Building Valuation: $895,000
Lot Size: 133,000 sq. ft.
Water Tap Size: 3/4"
Arvada Boulder Broomfield Fort Collins Greeley Johnstown Lakewood
Larimer
County Longmont Louisville Loveland Thornton Timnath Westminster Windsor
BUILDING RELATED FEES
Building Permit $5,653 $5,442 $5,110 $5,126 $5,110 $5,110 $4,425 $4,874 $5,875 $5,975 $5,110 $4,790 $5,110 $4,244 $4,420
Plan Review 3,675 1,360 3,322 2,468 2,811 1,533 2,876 2,437 2,938 3,884 3,322 3,114 3,322 2,759 2,873
Sales & Use Tax 15,484 19,511 18,571 19,914 13,935 16,110 15,663 2,685 18,236 19,243 16,110 20,138 16,110 17,229 17,900
Total Buiilding Fees $24,812 $26,313 $27,003 $27,508 $21,856 $22,753 $22,964 $9,996 $27,049 $29,102 $24,542 $28,042 $24,542 $24,232 $25,193
Ranking 8 6 5 3 14 13 12 15 4 1 9 2 9 11 7
UTILITY CAPITAL EXPANSION FEES
Water $26,850 $21,941 $22,454 $12,850 $10,600 $9,200 $16,030 $19,350 $25,900 $7,164 $30,773 $25,500 $20,836 $6,725
Sewer 9,893 8,786 12,559 6,550 5,600 3,600 10,124 8,800 4,400 5,770 10,569 4,500 5,554 3,700
Stormwater 246,582 21,481 10,773 23,940 15,621 14,905 22,001
Total Utility Capital Expansion Fees $36,743 $277,309 $35,013 $40,881 $26,973 $12,800 $26,154 $23,940 $43,771 $30,300 $27,839 $41,342 $30,000 $26,390 $32,426
Ranking 5 1 6 4 11 15 13 14 2 8 10 3 9 12 7
NON-UTILITY CAPITAL EXPANSION FEES
Air Quality
Fire 760 1,349 13,395 570
General Government 1,140 2,565 3,040 1,710 1,140
Golf 13,754
Human Services
Larimer Co. Transportation Expansion 3,249
Library
Museum
Open Space
Parks - Community
Parks - Neighborhood
Parks - Regional
Parks & Open Space 500
Parks & Trails
Police 760 779 3,800 380 950
Recreational Facilities
School - Land
School - Poudre SD
School - Thompson SD
School - Weld County SD
Streets Oversizing 21,470 64,600 6,460 36,746 42,492 950 16,400 25,384
Trails
Total Utility Capital Expansion Fees - 2,660 - 29,412 81,795 9,880 500 36,746 56,246 2,660 19,060 - - - 25,384
Ranking 11 8 11 4 1 7 10 3 2 8 6 11 11 11 5
Grand Total Fees $61,555 $306,282 $62,016 $97,801 $130,624 $45,433 $49,618 $70,682 $127,066 $62,062 $71,441 $69,384 $54,542 $50,622 $83,003
Ranking 11 1 10 4 2 15 14 7 3 9 6 8 12 13 5
Table A-5
Scenario 5:
Building Type: Mixed Use
Building Size Footage: 38,000 sq. ft.
(Residential 24,000 sq. ft.; Commercial
14,000 sq. ft.)
Lot Size: 14,000 sq. ft.
Building Valuation: $3,000,000
Dwelling units: 18
Water Tap Size: Residential 2";
Commercial 3/4"
Arvada Boulder Broomfield Fort Collins Greeley Johnstown Lakewood
Larimer
County Longmont Louisville Loveland Thornton Timnath Westminster Windsor
BUILDING RELATED FEES
Building Permit $14,284 $13,679 $12,909 $12,372 $12,909 $12,909 $10,845 $11,360 $14,849 $14,000 $12,909 $11,158 $12,909 $9,959 $10,370
Plan Review 9,285 3,420 8,391 5,957 7,100 3,873 7,049 5,680 7,424 9,100 8,391 7,252 8,391 6,473 6,740
Sales & Use Tax 51,900 65,400 62,250 66,750 46,710 54,000 52,500 9,000 61,125 64,500 54,000 67,500 54,000 57,750 60,000
Total Buiilding Fees $75,469 $82,499 $83,549 $85,079 $66,719 $70,781 $70,394 $26,040 $83,398 $87,600 $75,299 $85,910 $75,300 $74,183 $77,110
Ranking 8 6 4 3 14 12 13 15 5 1 10 2 9 11 7
UTILITY CAPITAL EXPANSION FEES
Water $170,050 $169,397 $264,957 $43,400 $106,000 $49,065 $114,020 $66,210 $305,620 $89,883 $277,103 $275,400 $245,865 $49,025
Sewer 108,983 66,296 238,621 51,010 56,000 22,800 112,940 35,200 69,200 34,930 112,341 85,500 65,537 26,973
Stormwater 25,956 2,261 5,345 2,520 1,644 1,498 2,316
Total Utility Capital Expansion Fees $279,033 $261,649 $503,578 $96,671 $167,345 $71,865 $226,960 $2,520 $103,054 $374,820 $126,311 $389,444 $360,900 $311,402 $78,314
Ranking 6 7 1 12 9 14 8 15 11 3 10 2 4 5 13
NON-UTILITY CAPITAL EXPANSION FEES
Air Quality
Fire $14,582 $10,618 $13,326 15,378
General Government 8,074 15,614 $34,626 $35,415 $20,252 19,524
Golf 1,448
Human Services 2,790
Larimer Co. Transportation Expansion 10,312
Library 8,622 3,491 4,860 9,090
Museum 7,596
Open Space 11,124
Parks - Community 26,262 22,446 21,672
Parks - Neighborhood. 30,978 13,896 64,116
Parks - Regional
Parks & Open Space 17,396
Parks & Trails 42,012 27,288 44,424
Police 7,784 5,570 9,274 15,437 16,476
Recreational $59,202 18,018 19,782
School - Land
Schools - Poudre SD 15,390
School - Thompson SD
School - Weld County SD 13,500
Trails 2,498 6,624
Streets Oversizing 96,894 129,200 47,500 113,332 92,849 11,332 89,843 69,452
Total Non-Utility CEF - 101,054 - 211,638 190,640 131,950 - 113,332 171,724 81,750 239,861 - - - 155,240
Ranking 10 8 10 2 3 6 10 7 4 9 1 10 10 10 5
Grand Total Fees $354,502 $445,202 $587,127 $393,388 $424,704 $274,596 $297,354 $141,892 $358,176 $544,170 $441,471 $475,354 $436,200 $385,585 $310,664
Ranking 11 4 1 8 7 14 13 15 10 2 5 3 6 9 12
City of Fort Collins
Appendix B
Single Family
Residential Detached
Building Fees Survey
September 30, 2014
Report Prepared By:
12835 E Arapahoe Rd. Tower II, Suite 600
Centennial, CO 80112-6726
(720) 638 - 3791
Summary of Building Fees Table B-1
Single Family Residential Detached 9/30/2014
Property Valuation of $300,000
Entity
Building Permit
Fee
Plan Review
Fee Use Tax
Total Building
Fees
Louisville $ 2,200 $ 1,430 $ 6,450 $ 10,080
Thornton $ 1,983 $ 1,289 $ 6,750 $ 10,021
Fort Collins $ 2,180 $ 1,049 $ 6,675 $ 9,904
Longmont $ 2,431 $ 1,215 $ 6,113 $ 9,758
Broomfield $ 2,114 $ 1,374 $ 6,225 $ 9,713
Boulder $ 2,249 $ 562 $ 6,540 $ 9,351
Arvada $ 2,339 $ 1,521 $ 5,190 $ 9,050
Windsor $ 1,837 $ 1,194 $ 6,000 $ 9,031
Loveland $ 2,114 $ 1,374 $ 5,400 $ 8,888
Timnath $ 2,114 $ 1,374 $ 5,400 $ 8,888
Westminster $ 1,764 $ 1,147 $ 5,775 $ 8,686
Lakewood $ 1,845 $ 1,199 $ 5,250 $ 8,294
Johnstown $ 2,114 $ 634 $ 5,400 $ 8,148
Greeley $ 2,114 $ 1,163 $ 4,671 $ 7,947
Larimer County $ 2,044 $ 1,022 $ 900 $ 3,966
$- $2,000 $4,000 $6,000 $8,000 $10,000 $12,000
Louisville
Thornton
Fort Collins
Longmont
Broomfield
Boulder
Arvada
Windsor
Loveland
Timnath
Westminster
Lakewood
Johnstown
Greeley
Larimer County
Single Family Residential Detached Building Fees Summary
(Property Value: $300,000)
Building Permit Fee Plan Review Fee Use Tax
City of Fort Collins
Appendix C
Office
Building Fees Survey
September 30, 2014
Report Prepared By:
12835 E Arapahoe Rd. Tower II, Suite 600
Centennial, CO 80112-6726
(720) 638 - 3791
Summary of Building Fees Table C-1
Office Building 9/30/2014
Property Valuation of $1,400,000
Entity
Building Permit
Fee
Plan Review
Fee Use Tax
Total Building
Fees
Louisville $ 7,600 $ 4,940 $ 30,100 $ 42,640
Thornton $ 6,438 $ 4,184 $ 31,500 $ 42,122
Fort Collins $ 6,972 $ 3,357 $ 31,150 $ 41,479
Longmont $ 8,129 $ 4,064 $ 28,525 $ 40,718
Broomfield $ 7,069 $ 4,595 $ 29,050 $ 40,713
Boulder $ 7,519 $ 1,880 $ 30,520 $ 39,919
Windsor $ 5,955 $ 3,871 $ 28,000 $ 37,826
Arvada $ 7,820 $ 5,083 $ 24,220 $ 37,124
Loveland $ 7,069 $ 4,595 $ 25,200 $ 36,863
Timnath $ 7,069 $ 4,595 $ 25,200 $ 36,863
Westminster $ 5,719 $ 3,717 $ 26,950 $ 36,387
Lakewood $ 6,045 $ 3,929 $ 24,500 $ 34,474
Johnstown $ 7,069 $ 2,121 $ 25,200 $ 34,389
Greeley $ 7,069 $ 3,888 $ 21,798 $ 32,755
Larimer County $ 6,544 $ 3,272 $ 4,200 $ 14,016
$0 $5,000 $10,000 $15,000 $20,000 $25,000 $30,000 $35,000 $40,000 $45,000
Louisville
Thornton
Fort Collins
Longmont
Broomfield
Boulder
Windsor
Arvada
Loveland
Timnath
Westminster
Lakewood
Johnstown
Greeley
Larimer County
Office Building Fees Summary
(Property Value: $1,400,000)
Building Permit Fee Plan Review Fee Use Tax
City of Fort Collins
Appendix D
Retail
Building Fees Survey
September 30, 2014
Report Prepared By:
12835 E Arapahoe Rd. Tower II, Suite 600
Centennial, CO 80112-6726
(720) 638 - 3791
Summary of Building Fees Table D-1
Retail Building 9/30/2014
Property Valuation of $550,000
Entity
Building Permit
Fee
Plan Review
Fee Use Tax
Total Building
Fees
Louisville $ 4,250 $ 2,763 $ 11,825 $ 18,838
Thornton $ 3,255 $ 2,116 $ 12,375 $ 17,746
Fort Collins $ 3,496 $ 1,683 $ 12,238 $ 17,417
Longmont $ 3,992 $ 1,996 $ 11,206 $ 17,194
Broomfield $ 3,471 $ 2,256 $ 11,413 $ 17,140
Boulder $ 3,700 $ 925 $ 11,990 $ 16,614
Windsor $ 3,001 $ 1,950 $ 11,000 $ 15,951
Arvada $ 3,842 $ 2,497 $ 9,515 $ 15,854
Loveland $ 3,471 $ 2,256 $ 9,900 $ 15,628
Timnath $ 3,471 $ 2,256 $ 9,900 $ 15,628
Westminster $ 2,882 $ 1,873 $ 10,588 $ 15,342
Lakewood $ 3,045 $ 1,979 $ 9,625 $ 14,649
Johnstown $ 3,471 $ 1,041 $ 9,900 $ 14,413
Greeley $ 3,471 $ 1,909 $ 8,564 $ 13,944
Larimer County $ 3,345 $ 1,672 $ 1,650 $ 6,667
$0 $2,000 $4,000 $6,000 $8,000 $10,000 $12,000 $14,000 $16,000 $18,000 $20,000
Louisville
Thornton
Fort Collins
Longmont
Broomfield
Boulder
Windsor
Arvada
Loveland
Timnath
Westminster
Lakewood
Johnstown
Greeley
Larimer County
Retail Building Fees Summary
(Property Value: $550,000)
Building Permit Fee Plan Review Fee Use Tax
City of Fort Collins
Appendix E
Warehouse
Building Fees Survey
September 30, 2014
Report Prepared By:
12835 E Arapahoe Rd. Tower II, Suite 600
Centennial, CO 80112-6726
(720) 638 - 3791
Summary of Building Fees Table E-1
Warehouse Building 9/30/2014
Property Valuation of $895,000
Entity
Building Permit
Fee
Plan Review
Fee Use Tax
Total Building
Fees
Louisville $ 5,975 $ 3,884 $ 19,243 $ 29,101
Thornton $ 4,790 $ 3,114 $ 20,138 $ 28,041
Fort Collins $ 5,126 $ 2,468 $ 19,914 $ 27,508
Longmont $ 5,875 $ 2,938 $ 18,236 $ 27,049
Broomfield $ 5,110 $ 3,322 $ 18,571 $ 27,003
Boulder $ 5,442 $ 1,360 $ 19,511 $ 26,313
Windsor $ 4,419 $ 2,873 $ 17,900 $ 25,192
Arvada $ 5,653 $ 3,675 $ 15,484 $ 24,811
Loveland $ 5,110 $ 3,322 $ 16,110 $ 24,542
Timnath $ 5,110 $ 3,322 $ 16,110 $ 24,542
Westminster $ 4,244 $ 2,759 $ 17,229 $ 24,232
Lakewood $ 4,425 $ 2,876 $ 15,663 $ 22,964
Johnstown $ 5,110 $ 1,533 $ 16,110 $ 22,753
Greeley $ 5,110 $ 2,811 $ 13,935 $ 21,856
Larimer County $ 4,874 $ 2,437 $ 2,685 $ 9,997
$0 $5,000 $10,000 $15,000 $20,000 $25,000 $30,000 $35,000
Louisville
Thornton
Fort Collins
Longmont
Broomfield
Boulder
Windsor
Arvada
Loveland
Timnath
Westminster
Lakewood
Johnstown
Greeley
Larimer County
Warehouse Building Fees Summary
(Property Value: $895,000)
Building Permit Fee Plan Review Fee Use Tax
City of Fort Collins
Appendix F
Mixed Use
Building Fees Survey
September 30, 2014
Report Prepared By:
12835 E Arapahoe Rd. Tower II, Suite 600
Centennial, CO 80112-6726
(720) 638 - 3791
Summary of Building Fees Table F-1
Mixed Use 9/30/2014
Property Valuation of $3,000,000
Entity
Building Permit
Fee
Plan Review
Fee Use Tax
Total Building
Fees
Louisville $ 14,000 $ 9,100 $ 64,500 $ 87,600
Thornton $ 11,158 $ 7,252 $ 67,500 $ 85,910
Fort Collins $ 12,372 $ 5,957 $ 66,750 $ 85,079
Broomfield $ 12,909 $ 8,391 $ 62,250 $ 83,549
Longmont $ 14,849 $ 7,424 $ 61,125 $ 83,398
Boulder $ 13,679 $ 3,420 $ 65,400 $ 82,499
Windsor $ 10,370 $ 6,740 $ 60,000 $ 77,110
Arvada $ 14,284 $ 9,285 $ 51,900 $ 75,469
Loveland $ 12,909 $ 8,391 $ 54,000 $ 75,299
Timnath $ 12,909 $ 8,391 $ 54,000 $ 75,299
Westminster $ 9,959 $ 6,473 $ 57,750 $ 74,183
Johnstown $ 12,909 $ 3,873 $ 54,000 $ 70,781
Lakewood $ 10,845 $ 7,049 $ 52,500 $ 70,394
Greeley $ 12,909 $ 7,100 $ 46,710 $ 66,719
Larimer County $ 11,360 $ 5,680 $ 9,000 $ 26,040
$0 $10,000 $20,000 $30,000 $40,000 $50,000 $60,000 $70,000 $80,000 $90,000 $100,000
Louisville
Thornton
Fort Collins
Broomfield
Longmont
Boulder
Windsor
Arvada
Loveland
Timnath
Westminster
Johnstown
Lakewood
Greeley
Larimer County
Mixed Use Building Fees Summary
(Property Value: $3,000,000)
Building Permit Fee Plan Review Fee Use Tax
City of Fort Collins
Appendix G
Single Family
Residential Detached
Utility Capital
Expansion Fees Survey
September 30, 2014
Report Prepared By:
12835 E Arapahoe Rd. Tower II, Suite 600
Centennial, CO 80112-6726
(720) 638 - 3791
Summary of Utility Capital Expansion Fees Table G-1
Single Family Residential Detached 9/29/2014
Impervious Area: 3,500 sq. ft.
Irrigable Area: 5,100 sq. ft.
Lot Size: 8,600 sq. ft.
Water Tap Size: 3/4"
Raw Water Cost: $30,970 per AF (CBT)
Tap Equivalent: 1.0
Entity Water Sewer Stormwater Total
Boulder $25,031 $4,473 $7,210 $36,714
Broomfield $22,454 $12,559 $0 $35,013
Greeley $28,943 $5,600 $325 $34,868
Louisville $25,900 $4,500 $0 $30,400
Timnath $25,777 $4,500 $0 $30,277
Westminster $20,836 $5,554 $0 $26,390
Thornton $20,735 $5,563 $0 $26,298
Loveland $22,995 $2,410 $517 $25,922
Lakewood $17,968 $6,560 $0 $24,528
Arvada $18,345 $5,539 $0 $23,884
Longmont $13,066 $6,830 $789 $20,685
Johnstown $9,200 $8,189 $0 $17,389
Fort Collins $8,672 $3,090 $1,324 $13,086
Windsor $6,725 $3,700 $632 $11,057
Larimer County $0 $0 $400 $400
$0 $5,000 $10,000 $15,000 $20,000 $25,000 $30,000 $35,000 $40,000
Boulder
Broomfield
Greeley
Louisville
Timnath
Westminster
Thornton
Loveland
Lakewood
Arvada
Longmont
Johnstown
Fort Collins
Windsor
Larimer County
Single Family Residential Detached
Utility Capital Expansion Fees Summary
(Water Meter Size: 3/4"; Imp. Area: 3,500 SF; Runoff Coefficient: 0.50)
Water Sewer Stormwater
City of Fort Collins
Appendix H
Office
Utility Capital
Expansion Fees Survey
September 30, 2014
Report Prepared By:
12835 E Arapahoe Rd. Tower II, Suite 600
Centennial, CO 80112-6726
(720) 638 - 3791
Summary of Utility Capital Expansion Fees Table H-1
Office Building 9/29/2014
Building Square Footage: 7,700 sq. ft.
Building Valuation: $1,400,000
Lot Size: 28,174
Water Tap Size: 1"
Tap Equivalent: 1.7
Entity Water Sewer Stormwater Total
Boulder $68,669 $26,785 $46,431 $141,885
Thornton $51,288 $25,032 $0 $76,320
Timnath $63,750 $11,250 $0 $75,000
Arvada $44,750 $21,768 $0 $66,518
Fort Collins $38,550 $15,440 $4,045 $58,035
Louisville $46,200 $7,900 $0 $54,100
Lakewood $27,670 $24,320 $0 $51,990
Longmont $32,270 $14,670 $2,941 $49,881
Westminster $35,421 $9,442 $0 $44,863
Broomfield $22,456 $21,350 $0 $43,806
Loveland $20,521 $18,850 $1,648 $41,019
Greeley $17,700 $9,400 $2,029 $29,129
Johnstown $15,467 $6,000 $0 $21,467
Windsor $10,895 $5,994 $4,143 $21,032
Larimer County $0 $0 $4,508 $4,508
$0 $20,000 $40,000 $60,000 $80,000 $100,000 $120,000 $140,000 $160,000
Boulder
Thornton
Timnath
Arvada
Fort Collins
Louisville
Lakewood
Longmont
Westminster
Broomfield
Loveland
Greeley
Johnstown
Windsor
Larimer County
Office Building Utility Capital Expansion Fees Summary
(Water Meter Size: 1"; Building SF: 7,700 SF; Building Valuation: $1.4M;
Lot Size: 28,174 SF; Tap Equiv.: 1.7)
Water Sewer Stormwater
City of Fort Collins
Appendix I
Retail
Utility Capital
Expansion Fees Survey
September 30, 2014
Report Prepared By:
12835 E Arapahoe Rd. Tower II, Suite 600
Centennial, CO 80112-6726
(720) 638 - 3791
Summary of Utility Capital Expansion Fees Table I-1
Retail Building 9/29/2014
Building Square Footage: 6,100 sq. ft.
Building Valuation: $550,000
Lot Size: 14,000
Water Tap Size: 3/4"
Tap Equivalent: 1.0
Entity Water Sewer Stormwater Total
Boulder $21,941 $8,786 $23,072 $53,799
Thornton $30,773 $10,569 $0 $41,342
Arvada $26,850 $9,893 $0 $36,743
Broomfield $22,454 $12,559 $0 $35,013
Louisville $25,900 $4,400 $0 $30,300
Timnath $25,500 $4,500 $0 $30,000
Longmont $19,350 $8,800 $1,462 $29,612
Westminster $20,836 $5,554 $0 $26,390
Lakewood $16,030 $10,124 $0 $26,154
Fort Collins $12,850 $6,550 $2,010 $21,410
Greeley $10,600 $5,600 $1,008 $17,208
Loveland $7,164 $5,770 $1,648 $14,582
Johnstown $9,200 $3,600 $0 $12,800
Windsor $6,725 $3,700 $2,059 $12,484
Larimer County $0 $0 $2,240 $2,240
$0 $10,000 $20,000 $30,000 $40,000 $50,000 $60,000
Boulder
Thornton
Arvada
Broomfield
Louisville
Timnath
Longmont
Westminster
Lakewood
Fort Collins
Greeley
Loveland
Johnstown
Windsor
Larimer County
Retail Building Utility Capital Expansion Fees Summary
(Water Meter Size: 3/4"; Building SF: 6,100 SF; Building Valuation: $550K;
Lot Size: 14,000 SF; Tap Equiv.: 1.0)
Water Sewer Stormwater
City of Fort Collins
Appendix J
Warehouse Building
Utility Capital
Expansion Fees Survey
September 30, 2014
Report Prepared By:
12835 E Arapahoe Rd. Tower II, Suite 600
Centennial, CO 80112-6726
(720) 638 - 3791
Summary of Utility Capital Expansion Fees Table J-1
Warehouse Building 9/29/2014
Building Square Footage: 19,000 sq. ft.
Building Valuation: $895,000
Lot Size: 133,000
Water Tap Size: 3/4"
Tap Equivalent: 1.0
Entity Water Sewer Stormwater Total
Boulder $21,941 $8,786 $246,582 $277,309
Longmont $19,350 $8,800 $15,621 $43,771
Thornton $30,773 $10,569 $0 $41,342
Fort Collins $12,850 $6,550 $21,481 $40,881
Arvada $26,850 $9,893 $0 $36,743
Broomfield $22,454 $12,559 $0 $35,013
Windsor $6,725 $3,700 $22,001 $32,426
Louisville $25,900 $4,400 $0 $30,300
Timnath $25,500 $4,500 $0 $30,000
Loveland $7,164 $5,770 $14,905 $27,839
Greeley $10,600 $5,600 $10,773 $26,973
Westminster $20,836 $5,554 $0 $26,390
Lakewood $16,030 $10,124 $0 $26,154
Larimer County $0 $0 $23,940 $23,940
Johnstown $9,200 $3,600 $0 $12,800
$0 $50,000 $100,000 $150,000 $200,000 $250,000 $300,000
Boulder
Longmont
Thornton
Fort Collins
Arvada
Broomfield
Windsor
Louisville
Timnath
Loveland
Greeley
Westminster
Lakewood
Larimer County
Johnstown
Warehouse Building Utility Capital Expansion Fees Summary
(Water Meter Size: 3/4"; Building SF: 19,000 SF; Building Valuation: $895K;
Lot Size: 133,000 SF; Tap Equiv.: 1.0)
Water Sewer Stormwater
City of Fort Collins
Appendix K
Mixed Use
Utility Capital
Expansion Fees Survey
September 30, 2014
Report Prepared By:
12835 E Arapahoe Rd. Tower II, Suite 600
Centennial, CO 80112-6726
(720) 638 - 3791
Summary of Utility Capital Expansion Fees Table K-1
Mixed Use 9/29/2014
Building Square Footage: 38,000 sq. ft.
(24,000 sq. ft. residential; 14,000 sq. ft. commercial)
Dwelling units: 18
Building Valuation: $3,000,000
Lot Size: 14,000
Water Tap Size: 2" residential; 3/4" commercial
Tap Equivalent (multifamily):
Multifamily, per unit 0.6
Commercial 1.0
Entity Water Sewer Stormwater Total
Broomfield $264,957 $238,621 $0 $503,578
Thornton $277,103 $112,341 $0 $389,444
Louisville $305,620 $69,200 $0 $374,820
Timnath $275,400 $85,500 $0 $360,900
Westminster $245,865 $65,537 $0 $311,402
Arvada $170,050 $108,983 $0 $279,033
Boulder $169,397 $66,296 $25,956 $261,649
Lakewood $114,020 $112,940 $0 $226,960
Greeley $106,000 $56,000 $5,345 $167,345
Loveland $89,883 $34,930 $1,498 $126,311
Longmont $66,210 $35,200 $1,644 $103,054
Fort Collins $43,400 $51,010 $2,261 $96,671
Windsor $49,025 $26,973 $2,316 $78,314
Johnstown $49,065 $22,800 $0 $71,865
Larimer County $0 $0 $2,520 $2,520
$0 $100,000 $200,000 $300,000 $400,000 $500,000 $600,000
Broomfield
Thornton
Louisville
Timnath
Westminster
Arvada
Boulder
Lakewood
Greeley
Loveland
Longmont
Fort Collins
Windsor
Johnstown
Larimer County
Mixed Use Utility Capital Expansion Fees Summary
(Residential Water Meter Size: 2"; Commercail Water Meter Size: 3/4";
Total Building SF: 38,000 SF; Residential SF: 24,000 SF; Commercial SF: 14,000 SF;
Residential Dwelling Units: 18; Building Valuation: $3
Water Sewer Stormwater
City of Fort Collins
Appendix L
Single Family
Residential Detached
Non-Utility Capital
Expansion Fees Survey
September 30, 2014
Report Prepared By:
12835 E Arapahoe Rd. Tower II, Suite 600
Centennial, CO 80112-6726
(720) 638 - 3791
Summary of Non-Utility Capital Expansion Fees Survey Table L-1
Single Family Residential Detached 9/30/2014
Property Valuation 300,000
Building Square Footage 2,000
No. of bedrooms 3
Entity Total
Parks, Open
Space, Trails
& Recreation Fire
General
Government Police Schools Library
Human
Services Streets Air Quality Museum
Total W/O
Schools
Loveland $13,109 $5,898 $678 $968 $881 $1,382 $627 $0 $2,170 $0 $505 $11,727
Fort Collins - Poudre School District $9,443 $3,313 $383 $455 $192 $1,710 $0 $0 $3,390 $0 $0 $7,733
Fort Collins - Thompson School District $9,115 $3,313 $383 $455 $192 $1,382 $0 $0 $3,390 $0 $0 $7,733
Longmont $7,951 $5,480 $0 $1,121 $0 $0 $0 $0 $1,099 $250 $0 $7,951
Windsor $6,976 $4,766 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $2,210 $0 $0 $6,976
Larimer County $6,388 $1,370 $100 $0 $0 $1,710 $0 $0 $3,208 $0 $0 $4,678
Johnstown $5,999 $1,612 $0 $1,143 $429 $750 $220 $0 $1,845 $0 $0 $5,249
Louisville $5,727 $4,423 $0 $604 $0 $0 $475 $0 $225 $0 $0 $5,727
Greeley $5,699 $3,206 $275 $0 $133 $0 $0 $0 $2,085 $0 $0 $5,699
Boulder $4,539 $3,147 $209 $280 $295 $0 $459 $149 $0 $0 $0 $4,539
Arvada $2,078 $1,484 $0 $0 $0 $594 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $1,484
Timnath $586 $0 $0 $384 $202 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $586
Broomfield $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
Lakewood $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
Thornton $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
Westminster $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
$0 $2,000 $4,000 $6,000 $8,000 $10,000 $12,000 $14,000
Loveland
Longmont
Fort Collins
Windsor
Louisville
Greeley
Johnstown
Larimer County
Boulder
Arvada
Timnath
Broomfield
Lakewood
Thornton
Westminster
Single Family Residential Detached
Non-Utility Capital Expansion Fees Summary (w/o Schools)
Parks, Open Space, Trails & Recreation
Fire
General Government
Police
Library
Human Services
Streets
Air Quality
Museum
$0 $2,000 $4,000 $6,000 $8,000 $10,000 $12,000 $14,000
Loveland
Fort Collins - Poudre School District
Fort Collins - Thompson School District
Longmont
Windsor
Larimer County
Johnstown
Louisville
Greeley
Boulder
Arvada
Timnath
Broomfield
Lakewood
Thornton
Westminster
Single Family Residential Detached
Non-Utility Capital Expansion Fees Summary (with Schools)
Parks, Open Space, Trails & Recreation
Fire
General Government
Police
Library
Human Services
Streets
Air Quality
Museum
Schools
$0 $1,000 $2,000 $3,000 $4,000 $5,000 $6,000 $7,000
Loveland
Longmont
Windsor
Louisville
Fort Collins - Poudre School District
Fort Collins - Thompson School District
Greeley
Boulder
Johnstown
Arvada
Larimer County
Broomfield
Lakewood
Thornton
Timnath
Westminster
Single Family Residential Detached -
Parks, Open Space, Trails & Recreation
$0 $100 $200 $300 $400 $500 $600 $700 $800
Loveland
Fort Collins - Poudre School District
Fort Collins - Thompson School District
Greeley
Boulder
Larimer County
Arvada
Broomfield
Johnstown
Lakewood
Longmont
Louisville
Thornton
Timnath
Westminster
Windsor
Single Family Residential Detached - Fire
$0 $200 $400 $600 $800 $1,000 $1,200 $1,400
Johnstown
Longmont
Loveland
Louisville
Fort Collins - Poudre School District
Fort Collins - Thompson School District
Timnath
Boulder
Arvada
Broomfield
Greeley
Lakewood
Larimer County
Thornton
Westminster
Windsor
Single Family Residential Detached - General Government
$0 $100 $200 $300 $400 $500 $600 $700 $800 $900 $1,000
Loveland
Johnstown
Boulder
Timnath
Fort Collins - Poudre School District
Fort Collins - Thompson School District
Greeley
Arvada
Broomfield
Lakewood
Larimer County
Longmont
Louisville
Thornton
Westminster
Windsor
Single Family Residential Detached - Police
$0 $100 $200 $300 $400 $500 $600 $700
Loveland
Louisville
Boulder
Johnstown
Arvada
Broomfield
Fort Collins - Poudre School District
Fort Collins - Thompson School District
Greeley
Lakewood
Larimer County
Longmont
Thornton
Timnath
Westminster
Windsor
Single Family Residential Detached - Library
$0 $20 $40 $60 $80 $100 $120 $140 $160
Boulder
Arvada
Broomfield
Fort Collins - Poudre School District
Fort Collins - Thompson School District
Greeley
Johnstown
Lakewood
Larimer County
Longmont
Louisville
Loveland
Thornton
Timnath
Westminster
Windsor
Single Family Residential Detached - Human Services
$0 $500 $1,000 $1,500 $2,000 $2,500 $3,000 $3,500 $4,000
Larimer County
Fort Collins - Poudre School District
Fort Collins - Thompson School District
Windsor
Loveland
Greeley
Johnstown
Longmont
Louisville
Arvada
Boulder
Broomfield
Lakewood
Thornton
Timnath
Westminster
Single Family Residential Detached - Streets
$0 $50 $100 $150 $200 $250 $300
Longmont
Arvada
Boulder
Broomfield
Fort Collins - Poudre School District
Fort Collins - Thompson School District
Greeley
Johnstown
Lakewood
Larimer County
Louisville
Loveland
Thornton
Timnath
Westminster
Windsor
Single Family Residential Detached - Air Quality
$0 $100 $200 $300 $400 $500 $600
Loveland
Arvada
Boulder
Broomfield
Fort Collins - Poudre School District
Fort Collins - Thompson School District
Greeley
Johnstown
Lakewood
Larimer County
Longmont
Louisville
Thornton
Timnath
Westminster
Windsor
Single Family Residential Detached - Museum
$0 $200 $400 $600 $800 $1,000 $1,200 $1,400 $1,600 $1,800
Fort Collins - Poudre School District
Larimer County
Loveland
Fort Collins - Thompson School District
Johnstown
Arvada
Boulder
Broomfield
Greeley
Lakewood
Longmont
Louisville
Thornton
Timnath
Westminster
Windsor
Single Family Residential Detached - Schools
City of Fort Collins
Appendix M
Office
Non-Utility Capital
Expansion Fees Survey
September 30, 2014
Report Prepared By:
12835 E Arapahoe Rd. Tower II, Suite 600
Centennial, CO 80112-6726
(720) 638 - 3791
Summary of Non-Utility Capital Expansion Fees Survey Table M-1
Office Building 9/30/2014
Building Square Footage: 7,700 sq ft
Building Valuation: $1,400,000
Lot Size: 28,174 sq ft
Water Tap Size: 1"
Entity Total
Parks, Open
Space, Trails
& Recreation Fire
General
Government Police Schools Library
Human
Services Streets Air Quality Museum
Total W/O
Schools
Loveland $42,346 $0 $2,310 $3,234 $3,003 $0 $0 $0 $33,799 $0 $0 $42,346
Larimer County $40,048 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $40,048 $0 $0 $40,048
Fort Collins - Poudre School District $39,516 $0 $2,187 $4,281 $1,232 $0 $0 $0 $31,816 $0 $0 $39,516
Fort Collins - Thompson School District $39,516 $0 $2,187 $4,281 $1,232 $0 $0 $0 $31,816 $0 $0 $39,516
Greeley $33,149 $0 $5,429 $0 $1,540 $0 $0 $0 $26,180 $0 $0 $33,149
Longmont $22,898 $2,590 $0 $3,088 $0 $0 $0 $0 $17,220 $0 $0 $22,898
Windsor $22,854 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $22,854 $0 $0 $22,854
Johnstown $14,553 $0 $0 $4,235 $693 $0 $0 $0 $9,625 $0 $0 $14,553
Boulder $7,238 $0 $4,466 $1,540 $1,232 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $7,238
Louisville $4,620 $0 $0 $2,849 $0 $0 $0 $0 $1,771 $0 $0 $4,620
Lakewood $500 $500 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $500
Arvada $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
Broomfield $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
Thornton $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
Timnath $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
Westminster $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
$0 $5,000 $10,000 $15,000 $20,000 $25,000 $30,000 $35,000 $40,000 $45,000
Loveland
Larimer County
Fort Collins
Greeley
Longmont
Windsor
Johnstown
Boulder
Louisville
Lakewood
Arvada
Timnath
Broomfield
Thornton
Westminster
Office Building
Non-Utility Capital Expansion Fees Summary
Parks, Open Space, Trails & Recreation
Fire
General Government
Police
Library
Human Services
Streets
Air Quality
Museum
$0 $500 $1,000 $1,500 $2,000 $2,500 $3,000
Longmont
Lakewood
Arvada
Boulder
Broomfield
Fort Collins - Poudre School District
Fort Collins - Thompson School District
Greeley
Johnstown
Larimer County
Louisville
Loveland
Thornton
Timnath
Westminster
Windsor
Office Building - Parks, Open Space, Trails & Recreation
$0 $1,000 $2,000 $3,000 $4,000 $5,000 $6,000
Greeley
Boulder
Loveland
Fort Collins - Poudre School District
Fort Collins - Thompson School District
Arvada
Broomfield
Johnstown
Lakewood
Larimer County
Longmont
Louisville
Thornton
Timnath
Westminster
Windsor
Office Building - Fire
$0 $500 $1,000 $1,500 $2,000 $2,500 $3,000 $3,500 $4,000 $4,500
Fort Collins - Poudre School District
Fort Collins - Thompson School District
Johnstown
Loveland
Longmont
Louisville
Boulder
Arvada
Broomfield
Greeley
Lakewood
Larimer County
Thornton
Timnath
Westminster
Windsor
Office Building - General Government
$0 $500 $1,000 $1,500 $2,000 $2,500 $3,000 $3,500
Loveland
Greeley
Boulder
Fort Collins - Poudre School District
Fort Collins - Thompson School District
Johnstown
Timnath
Arvada
Broomfield
Lakewood
Larimer County
Longmont
Louisville
Thornton
Westminster
Windsor
Office Building - Police
$0 $5,000 $10,000 $15,000 $20,000 $25,000 $30,000 $35,000 $40,000 $45,000
Larimer County
Loveland
Fort Collins - Poudre School District
Fort Collins - Thompson School District
Greeley
Windsor
Longmont
Johnstown
Louisville
Arvada
Boulder
Broomfield
Lakewood
Thornton
Timnath
Westminster
Office Building - Streets
City of Fort Collins
Appendix N
Retail
Non-Utility Capital
Expansion Fees Survey
September 30, 2014
Report Prepared By:
12835 E Arapahoe Rd. Tower II, Suite 600
Centennial, CO 80112-6726
(720) 638 - 3791
Summary of Non-Utility Capital Expansion Fees Survey Table N-1
Retail Building 9/30/2014
Building Square Footage: 6,100 sq ft
Building Valuation: $550,000
Lot Size: 14,000 sq ft
Water Tap Size: 3/4"
Entity Total
Parks, Open
Space, Trails
& Recreation Fire
General
Government Police Schools Library
Human
Services Streets Air Quality Museum
Total W/O
Schools
Larimer County $71,132 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $71,132 $0 $0 $71,132
Greeley $49,807 $0 $4,301 $0 $1,220 $0 $0 $0 $44,286 $0 $0 $49,807
Fort Collins - Poudre School District $46,860 $0 $1,732 $3,392 $976 $0 $0 $0 $40,760 $0 $0 $46,860
Fort Collins - Thompson School District $46,860 $0 $1,732 $3,392 $976 $0 $0 $0 $40,760 $0 $0 $46,860
Loveland $39,068 $0 $1,830 $2,562 $2,379 $0 $0 $0 $32,297 $0 $0 $39,068
Windsor $22,143 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $22,143 $0 $0 $22,143
Longmont $17,375 $1,287 $0 $2,446 $0 $0 $0 $0 $13,642 $0 $0 $17,375
Johnstown $11,712 $0 $0 $2,684 $1,403 $0 $0 $0 $7,625 $0 $0 $11,712
Boulder $6,100 $0 $2,318 $854 $2,928 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $6,100
Louisville $4,270 $0 $0 $1,647 $0 $0 $0 $0 $2,623 $0 $0 $4,270
Lakewood $500 $500 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $500
Arvada $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
Broomfield $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
Thornton $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
Timnath $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
Westminster $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
$0 $10,000 $20,000 $30,000 $40,000 $50,000 $60,000 $70,000 $80,000
Larimer County
Greeley
Fort Collins
Loveland
Windsor
Longmont
Johnstown
Boulder
Louisville
Lakewood
Arvada
Timnath
Broomfield
Thornton
Westminster
Retail Building
Non-Utility Capital Expansion Fees Summary
Parks, Open Space, Trails & Recreation
Fire
General Government
Police
Library
Human Services
Streets
Air Quality
Museum
$0 $200 $400 $600 $800 $1,000 $1,200 $1,400
Longmont
Lakewood
Arvada
Boulder
Broomfield
Fort Collins - Poudre School District
Fort Collins - Thompson School District
Greeley
Johnstown
Larimer County
Louisville
Loveland
Thornton
Timnath
Westminster
Windsor
Retail Building - Parks, Open Space, Trails & Recreation
$0 $500 $1,000 $1,500 $2,000 $2,500 $3,000 $3,500 $4,000 $4,500 $5,000
Greeley
Boulder
Loveland
Fort Collins - Poudre School District
Fort Collins - Thompson School District
Arvada
Broomfield
Johnstown
Lakewood
Larimer County
Longmont
Louisville
Thornton
Timnath
Westminster
Windsor
Retail Building - Fire
$0 $500 $1,000 $1,500 $2,000 $2,500 $3,000 $3,500 $4,000
Fort Collins - Poudre School District
Fort Collins - Thompson School District
Johnstown
Loveland
Longmont
Louisville
Boulder
Arvada
Broomfield
Greeley
Lakewood
Larimer County
Thornton
Timnath
Westminster
Windsor
Retail Building - General Government
$0 $500 $1,000 $1,500 $2,000 $2,500 $3,000 $3,500
Boulder
Loveland
Johnstown
Greeley
Fort Collins - Poudre School District
Fort Collins - Thompson School District
Arvada
Broomfield
Lakewood
Larimer County
Longmont
Louisville
Thornton
Timnath
Westminster
Windsor
Retail Building - Police
$0 $10,000 $20,000 $30,000 $40,000 $50,000 $60,000 $70,000 $80,000
Larimer County
Greeley
Fort Collins - Poudre School District
Fort Collins - Thompson School District
Loveland
Windsor
Longmont
Johnstown
Louisville
Arvada
Boulder
Broomfield
Lakewood
Thornton
Timnath
Westminster
Retail Building - Streets
City of Fort Collins
Appendix O
Warehouse Building
Non-Utility Capital
Expansion Fees Survey
September 30, 2014
Report Prepared By:
12835 E Arapahoe Rd. Tower II, Suite 600
Centennial, CO 80112-6726
(720) 638 - 3791
Summary of Non-Utility Capital Expansion Fees Survey Table O-1
Warehouse Building 9/30/2014
Building Square Footage: 19,000 sq ft
Building Valuation: $895,000
Lot Size: 133,000 sq ft
Water Tap Size: 3/4"
Entity Total
Parks, Open
Space, Trails
& Recreation Fire
General
Government Police Schools Library
Human
Services Streets Air Quality Museum
Total W/O
Schools
Greeley $81,795 $0 $13,395 $0 $3,800 $0 $0 $0 $64,600 $0 $0 $81,795
Longmont $63,864 $13,754 $0 $7,619 $0 $0 $0 $0 $42,492 $0 $0 $63,864
Larimer County $36,746 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $36,746 $0 $0 $36,746
Fort Collins - Poudre School District $29,412 $0 $1,349 $2,565 $779 $0 $0 $0 $24,719 $0 $0 $29,412
Fort Collins - Thompson School District $29,412 $0 $1,349 $2,565 $779 $0 $0 $0 $24,719 $0 $0 $29,412
Windsor $25,384 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $25,384 $0 $0 $25,384
Loveland $19,060 $0 $570 $1,140 $950 $0 $0 $0 $16,400 $0 $0 $19,060
Johnstown $9,880 $0 $0 $3,040 $380 $0 $0 $0 $6,460 $0 $0 $9,880
Boulder $2,660 $0 $760 $1,140 $760 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $2,660
Louisville $2,660 $0 $0 $1,710 $0 $0 $0 $0 $950 $0 $0 $2,660
Lakewood $500 $500 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $500
Arvada $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
Broomfield $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
Thornton $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
Timnath $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
Westminster $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
$0 $10,000 $20,000 $30,000 $40,000 $50,000 $60,000 $70,000 $80,000 $90,000
Greeley
Longmont
Larimer County
Fort Collins
Windsor
Loveland
Johnstown
Louisville
Boulder
Lakewood
Arvada
Timnath
Broomfield
Thornton
Westminster
Warehouse Building
Non-Utility Capital Expansion Fees Summary
Parks, Open Space, Trails & Recreation
Fire
General Government
Police
Library
Human Services
Streets
Air Quality
Museum
$0 $2,000 $4,000 $6,000 $8,000 $10,000 $12,000 $14,000 $16,000
Longmont
Lakewood
Arvada
Boulder
Broomfield
Fort Collins - Poudre School District
Fort Collins - Thompson School District
Greeley
Johnstown
Larimer County
Louisville
Loveland
Thornton
Timnath
Westminster
Windsor
Warehouse Building - Parks, Open Space, Trails & Recreation
$0 $2,000 $4,000 $6,000 $8,000 $10,000 $12,000 $14,000 $16,000
Greeley
Fort Collins - Poudre School District
Fort Collins - Thompson School District
Boulder
Loveland
Arvada
Broomfield
Johnstown
Lakewood
Larimer County
Longmont
Louisville
Thornton
Timnath
Westminster
Windsor
Warehouse Building - Fire
$0 $1,000 $2,000 $3,000 $4,000 $5,000 $6,000 $7,000 $8,000
Longmont
Johnstown
Fort Collins - Poudre School District
Fort Collins - Thompson School District
Louisville
Boulder
Loveland
Arvada
Broomfield
Greeley
Lakewood
Larimer County
Thornton
Timnath
Westminster
Windsor
Warehouse Building - General Government
$0 $500 $1,000 $1,500 $2,000 $2,500 $3,000 $3,500 $4,000
Greeley
Fort Collins - Poudre School District
Fort Collins - Thompson School District
Boulder
Loveland
Johnstown
Arvada
Broomfield
Lakewood
Larimer County
Longmont
Louisville
Thornton
Timnath
Westminster
Windsor
Warehouse Building - Police
$0 $10,000 $20,000 $30,000 $40,000 $50,000 $60,000 $70,000
Greeley
Longmont
Larimer County
Windsor
Fort Collins - Poudre School District
Fort Collins - Thompson School District
Loveland
Johnstown
Louisville
Arvada
Boulder
Broomfield
Lakewood
Thornton
Timnath
Westminster
Warehouse Building - Streets
City of Fort Collins
Appendix P
Mixed Use
Non-Utility Capital
Expansion Fees Survey
September 30, 2014
Report Prepared By:
12835 E Arapahoe Rd. Tower II, Suite 600
Centennial, CO 80112-6726
(720) 638 - 3791
Summary of Non-Utility Capital Expansion Fees Survey Table P-1
Mixed Use 10/7/2014
Building Square Footage: 38,000 sq ft
(24,000 sq. ft. residential; 14,000 sq. ft. commercial)
Dwelling units: 18
Multifamily sq ft per du 1,333
Building Valuation: $3,000,000
Lot Size: 14,000 sq ft
Water Tap Size: 2" residential; 3/4" commercial
Entity Total
Parks, Open
Space, Trails
& Recreation Fire
General
Government Police Schools Library
Human
Services Streets Air Quality Museum
Total W/O
Schools
Loveland $239,861 $81,954 $15,378 $19,524 $16,476 $0 $9,090 $0 $89,843 $0 $7,596 $239,861
Fort Collins - Thompson School District $213,276 $57,240 $10,618 $15,614 $5,570 $17,028 $0 $0 $107,206 $0 $0 $196,248
Fort Collins - Poudre School District $211,638 $57,240 $10,618 $15,614 $5,570 $15,390 $0 $0 $107,206 $0 $0 $196,248
Greeley $190,640 $38,840 $13,326 $0 $9,274 $0 $0 $0 $129,200 $0 $0 $190,640
Longmont $171,724 $43,460 $0 $35,415 $0 $0 $0 $0 $92,849 $0 $0 $171,724
Windsor $155,240 $85,788 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $69,452 $0 $0 $155,240
Johnstown $131,949 $17,396 $0 $34,626 $15,437 $13,500 $3,491 $0 $47,500 $0 $0 $118,449
Larimer County $113,332 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $113,332 $0 $0 $113,332
Boulder $101,054 $59,202 $14,582 $8,074 $7,784 $0 $8,622 $2,790 $0 $0 $0 $101,054
Louisville $81,750 $45,306 $0 $20,252 $0 $0 $4,860 $0 $11,332 $0 $0 $81,750
Arvada $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
Broomfield $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
Lakewood $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
Thornton $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
Timnath $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
Westminster $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
$0 $50,000 $100,000 $150,000 $200,000 $250,000 $300,000
Loveland
Fort Collins
Greeley
Longmont
Windsor
Johnstown
Larimer County
Boulder
Louisville
Arvada
Timnath
Broomfield
Lakewood
Thornton
Westminster
Mixed Use
Non-Utility Capital Expansion Fees Summary (w/o Schools)
Parks, Open Space, Trails & Recreation
Fire
General Government
Police
Library
Human Services
Streets
Air Quality
Museum
$0 $50,000 $100,000 $150,000 $200,000 $250,000 $300,000
Loveland
Fort Collins - Thompson School District
Fort Collins - Poudre School District
Greeley
Longmont
Windsor
Johnstown
Larimer County
Boulder
Louisville
Arvada
Broomfield
Lakewood
Thornton
Timnath
Westminster
Mixed Use
Non-Utility Capital Expansion Fees Summary (with Schools)
Parks, Open Space, Trails & Recreation
Fire
General Government
Police
Library
Human Services
Streets
Air Quality
Museum
Schools
$0 $10,000 $20,000 $30,000 $40,000 $50,000 $60,000 $70,000 $80,000 $90,000 $100,000
Windsor
Loveland
Boulder
Fort Collins - Poudre School District
Fort Collins - Thompson School District
Louisville
Longmont
Greeley
Johnstown
Arvada
Broomfield
Lakewood
Larimer County
Thornton
Timnath
Westminster
Mixed Use - Parks, Open Space, Trails & Recreation
$0 $2,000 $4,000 $6,000 $8,000 $10,000 $12,000 $14,000 $16,000 $18,000
Loveland
Boulder
Greeley
Fort Collins - Poudre School District
Fort Collins - Thompson School District
Arvada
Broomfield
Johnstown
Lakewood
Larimer County
Longmont
Louisville
Thornton
Timnath
Westminster
Windsor
Mixed Use - Fire
$0 $5,000 $10,000 $15,000 $20,000 $25,000 $30,000 $35,000 $40,000
Longmont
Johnstown
Louisville
Loveland
Fort Collins - Poudre School District
Fort Collins - Thompson School District
Boulder
Arvada
Broomfield
Greeley
Lakewood
Larimer County
Thornton
Timnath
Westminster
Windsor
Mixed Use - General Government
$0 $2,000 $4,000 $6,000 $8,000 $10,000 $12,000 $14,000 $16,000 $18,000
Loveland
Johnstown
Greeley
Boulder
Fort Collins - Poudre School District
Fort Collins - Thompson School District
Arvada
Broomfield
Lakewood
Larimer County
Longmont
Louisville
Thornton
Timnath
Westminster
Windsor
Mixed Use - Police
$0 $1,000 $2,000 $3,000 $4,000 $5,000 $6,000 $7,000 $8,000 $9,000 $10,000
Loveland
Boulder
Louisville
Johnstown
Arvada
Broomfield
Fort Collins - Poudre School District
Fort Collins - Thompson School District
Greeley
Lakewood
Larimer County
Longmont
Thornton
Timnath
Westminster
Windsor
Mixed Use - Library
$0 $500 $1,000 $1,500 $2,000 $2,500 $3,000
Boulder
Arvada
Broomfield
Fort Collins - Poudre School District
Fort Collins - Thompson School District
Greeley
Johnstown
Lakewood
Larimer County
Longmont
Louisville
Loveland
Thornton
Timnath
Westminster
Windsor
Mixed Use - Human Services
$0 $20,000 $40,000 $60,000 $80,000 $100,000 $120,000 $140,000
Greeley
Larimer County
Fort Collins - Poudre School District
Fort Collins - Thompson School District
Longmont
Loveland
Windsor
Johnstown
Louisville
Arvada
Boulder
Broomfield
Lakewood
Thornton
Timnath
Westminster
Mixed Use - Streets
$0 $1,000 $2,000 $3,000 $4,000 $5,000 $6,000 $7,000 $8,000
Loveland
Arvada
Boulder
Broomfield
Fort Collins - Poudre School District
Fort Collins - Thompson School District
Greeley
Johnstown
Lakewood
Larimer County
Longmont
Louisville
Thornton
Timnath
Westminster
Windsor
Mixed Use - Museum
$0 $2,000 $4,000 $6,000 $8,000 $10,000 $12,000 $14,000 $16,000 $18,000
Fort Collins - Thompson School District
Fort Collins - Poudre School District
Johnstown
Arvada
Boulder
Broomfield
Greeley
Lakewood
Larimer County
Longmont
Louisville
Loveland
Thornton
Timnath
Westminster
Windsor
Mixed Use - Schools
October 20, 2014
COUNCIL FINANCE COMMITTEE
AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY
Staff: Mike Beckstead and Lawrence Pollack
Date: October 20, 2014
SUBJECT FOR DISCUSSION
First Reading of Ordinances No. , 2014, No. , 2014, No. , 2014, and No. , 2014 Appropriating Prior
Year Reserves and Unanticipated Revenue in Various City Funds and Authorizing the Transfer of
Appropriated Amounts between Funds or Projects.
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
The purpose of this item is for the Annual Year-End Adjustment. This year it is comprised of 4 separate
ordinances. Ordinance No. , 2014 is for the appropriation of non-controversial expenses related to
unanticipated revenue, grants, and unforeseen costs that had not previously been budgeted. Ordinance
No. , 2014, appropriates funds from the Benefits Fund to cover unanticipated expenditures and employee
benefits. Ordinance No. , 2014, appropriates funds for snow removal for the remainder of 2014 as the
entire snow removal budget has been spent. Ordinance No. , 2014, appropriates prior year reserves for
property and liability claims that are expected to exceed budget.
A. First Reading of Ordinance No. , 2014, Appropriating Prior Year Reserves and Unanticipated
Revenue in Various City Funds and Authorizing the Transfer of Appropriated Amounts Between
Funds or Projects
The following 3 ordinances were reviewed with the Council Finance Committee during their
September meeting:
B. First Reading of Ordinance No. ,2014, Appropriating Prior Year Reserves in the Benefits Fund to be
Used for Unanticipated Expenditure Increases
C. First Reading of Ordinance No. , 2014, Appropriating Prior Year Reserves in the Transportation Fund
for Snow Removal
D. First Reading of Ordinance No. , 2014, Appropriating Prior Year Reserves in the Self-Insurance
Fund for Insurance Expenses
GENERAL DIRECTION SOUGHT AND SPECIFIC QUESTIONS TO BE ANSWERED
- What questions or concerns do Council Finance Committee members have about the
specific items included in the Annual Year-End Adjustment Ordinance?
October 20, 2014
BACKGROUND/DISCUSSION
SUMMARY
1. First Reading of Ordinance No. , 2014, Appropriating Prior Year Reserves and Unanticipated
Revenue in Various City Funds and Authorizing the Transfer of Appropriated Amounts Between
Funds or Projects.
The annual Budget Adjustment Ordinance allows for the appropriation of expenses related to
unanticipated revenue, grants and unforeseen costs that had not previously been budgeted.
The purpose of this annual Budget Adjustment Ordinance is to combine dedicated and unanticipated
revenues or reserves that need to be appropriated before the end of the year to cover the related
expenses that were not anticipated and, therefore, not included in the 2014 budget appropriation. The
unanticipated revenue is primarily from fees, charges, rents, contributions and grants that have been paid
to City departments to offset specific expenses. Prior year reserves are primarily being appropriated for
unanticipated operational expenses.
The table below is a summary of the expenses in each fund that make up the increase in requested
appropriations:
Funding
Unanticipated
Revenue Reserves
Increase to
City Approp.
General Fund $1,342,821 $446,826 $1,789,647
Capital Expansion Fund $60,000 $0 $60,000
Capital Projects Fund $481,297 $0 $481,297
Conservation Trust $190,000 $510,000 $700,000
Cultural Services & Facilities Fund $41,411 $1,019,793 $1,061,204
Golf Fund $98,000 $0 $98,000
KFCG Fund $0 $215,096 $215,096
Light & Power Fund $0 $100,000 $100,000
Natural Areas Fund $618,070 $0 $618,070
Recreation Fund $27,242 $0 $27,242
Sales & Use Tax Fund $0 $985,192 $985,192
Stormwater Fund $0 $106,125 $106,125
Timberline/Prospect SID #94 $60,048 $0 $60,048
Transit Services Fund $657,531 $0 $657,531
Transportation Fund $10,667 $0 $10,667
Wastewater Fund $0 $100,000 $100,000
Water Fund $0 $100,000 $100,000
Annual Year-End Adjustment Total $3,587,087 $3,583,032 $7,170,119
Note: This table summarizes the details of Ordinance No. , 2014. It does not
include the amounts from the other 3 ordinances in this combined AIS.
This Ordinance appropriates prior year reserves and unanticipated revenue in various City funds, and
authorizes the transfer of appropriated amounts between funds. The City Charter permits the City
Council to provide, by ordinance, for payment of any expense from prior year reserves. The Charter also
permits the City Council to appropriate unanticipated revenue received as a result of rate or fee increases
or new revenue sources. Additionally, it authorizes the City Council to transfer any unexpended
appropriated amounts from one fund to another upon recommendation of the City Manager, provided that
the purpose for which the transferred funds are to be expended remains unchanged; the purpose for
which they were initially appropriated no longer exists; or the proposed transfer is from a fund or capital
October 20, 2014
project account in which the amount appropriated exceeds the amount needed to accomplish the purpose
specified in the appropriation ordinance.
The other three ordinances are for significant cost overruns greater than the original 2014 budget
appropriation as follows. These were reviewed with the Council Finance Committee on September 15,
2014:
2. First Reading of Ordinance No. 2014, Appropriating Prior Year Reserves in the Benefits Fund
to be Used to Cover Medical Claims.
3. First Reading of Ordinance No. , 2014, Appropriating Prior Year Reserves in the Transportation
Fund for Snow Removal.
4. First Reading of Ordinance No. , 2014, Appropriating Prior Year Reserves in the Self-Insurance
Fund for Insurance Expenses.
Funding
Unanticipated
Revenue Reserves
Increase to
City
Approp.
Benefits Fund $0 $1,850,000 $1,850,000
Self-Insurance Fund $0 $610,000 $610,000
Transportation Fund $0 $800,000 $800,000
Additional Year-End Adjustments
Total $0 $3,260,000 $3,260,000
APPROPRIATION DETAILS:
1. First Reading of Ordinance No. , 2014, Appropriating Prior Year Reserves and Unanticipated
Revenue in Various City Funds and Authorizing the Transfer of Appropriated Amounts Between
Funds or Projects.
A. GENERAL FUND
1. Fort Collins Police Services (FCPS) has received revenue from various sources which need to be
appropriated to cover the related expenditures. A listing of these items follows:
a. $28,800 - Chemical Test Fees & Driving w/o Insurance Penalty Assessments - Pursuant to
C.R.S. 16-11-501(2) (j), the costs of chemical tests (blood/breath tests) shall be reimbursed
directly by the defendant to the law enforcement agency which administered and paid for the
test. The driving without insurance law provides revenue to the law enforcement agency
issuing the citation. It is projected that by the end of 2014, $28,800 will have been collected
by the courts and passed on to Police Services under these provisions. The revenue is used
to directly offset the actual cost of blood/breath testing for DUI and DUID (driving under the
influence of drugs). Charges from local hospitals and the Colorado Bureau of Investigations
laboratory total $27,000 thus far in 2014.
b. $38,870 – High Intensity Drug Trafficking Area Grant - In 2014, the Rocky Mountain High
Intensity Drug Trafficking Area increased the award of the 2013 FY grant by $38,870. The
grant funds will be used by the Northern Colorado Drug Task Force to upgrade outdated
equipment. No City match is required.
c. $12,709 – Internet Crimes Against Persons Grant - In 2012-2013, Police Services was the
October 20, 2014
subrecipient of grant funds from the Internet Crimes Against Persons Grant (ICAC). The grant
paid for investigator training and software to assist in ICAC investigations. This item is to
appropriate grant revenue in the amount of $12,709. No City match is required.
d. $20,000 - 2014 Northern Colorado Drug Task Force Reserve Request - Fort Collins Police
Services is the fiduciary agency for the Northern Colorado Drug Task Force. The multi-
agency task force is a collaborative effort staffed by Fort Collins and Loveland law
enforcement personnel. The budget for the task force was appropriated early in 2014. Since
then, a computer server had to be replaced. This item appropriates money from the Task
Force reserve the money to cover the expense.
e. $2,600 – K-9 Donation - In 2014, a generous Fort Collins resident donated $2,600 to the
Police K-9 program. City policy requires the donation be appropriated via this ordinance for
transparency purposes. The money was used for handler travel and training to pick up a new
K-9 that was purchased late in 2013.
f. $172,839 – Police Overtime and Straight Time Reimbursement - In 2014, Police Services
received reimbursement from various entities for overtime expenses. The different activities
include: CSU football traffic control, Tour De Fat, Brew Fest, New West Fest, regional auto
theft case investigations, Poudre School District school board meetings, MAX implementation,
and noise ordinance violation workshops. Additionally, in 2014 FCPS partnered with Larimer
County to staff events at The Ranch. Police receives reimbursement from Larimer County for
officer hours worked at Ranch events. Additionally, Police Services implemented a new CAD
system in conjunction with Larimer County where a significant amount of overtime was
incurred to install the system, troubleshoot problems and train staff.
g. $52,529 – Poudre Valley Hospital Dispatch Contract Revenue - In the beginning of 2013, Fort
Collins Police Services renegotiated the contract for providing dispatching services for Poudre
Valley Health Systems. This resulted in more revenue than was originally projected for 2014.
In addition, the hospital reimbursed Police Services for a dispatch console that was replaced
as part of the 800 MHz project late in 2013.
h. $35,171 – Police Report Fees - Police reports purchased by the public and insurance
agencies generate revenue of approximately $7.50 a report. For 2014, it is estimated that
$35,170 will be collected. The revenue from this fee is used to subsidize the cost of copy
machine rental expenses.
i. $90,997 – Vehicle Loss Reimbursement - In 2013, Police vehicles were damaged in motor
vehicle collisions. The cost recovered by insurance claims is used to offset the cost of repair
and replace totaled vehicles.
j. $3,290 – Miscellaneous Vendor Refunds - Police Services received $3,290 from
miscellaneous sources for the reimbursement of lost employee gate FOB's, cancelled training,
and other vendor refunds. The reimbursement of funds goes to offset the cost of the original
items/services purchased and subsequently returned/cancelled.
k. $3,250 – SWAT Training Fees - In 2014, the Fort Collins Police SWAT team hosted training
for other agencies and charged attendees a fee. Fort Collins Police Services is proudly the
home of nationally recognized trainers who are experts in their field. By hosting training,
revenue is generated for the SWAT program and FCPS SWAT members get to train without
incurring travel expenses. The registration revenue offsets the cost of the training materials
for the class.
l. $90,424 – Sale of Retired 800 MHz Radio Equipment - In early 2013, Police Services
replaced portable and mobile radios. Police sold the old radios to Jefferson County for
$78,600. Also in 2014, other City departments purchased equipment for Transit Officers.
This revenue will be used to offset the cost of new computer and communications equipment.
October 20, 2014
m. $15,000 – Sale of Traffic Unit Motorcycles to Larimer County Sheriff's Office - The revenue
received from Larimer County needs to be returned to the Camera Radar fund since the
original purchase came from that account. New motorcycles were purchased in 2014 and this
revenue will offset the cost of the new units and equipment.
n. $6,988 – 2014 Seatbelt Grant - In 2014, Fort Collins Police received a grant from the
Colorado Department of Transportation for two waves of Seatbelt Grant Enforcement. The
grant paid for officers to work overtime to conduct enforcement activities.
o. $11,597 – DUI Enforcement Grant - In 2014, Fort Collins Police received $11,597 in grant
funds from the Colorado Department of Transportation to pay for overtime for DUI
enforcement. No City match is required.
FROM: Unanticipated Revenue (Miscellaneous Police) $463,220
FROM: Prior Year Reserves - No. Colorado Drug Task Force $20,000
FROM: Prior Year Reserves – Police CAD $31,680
FROM: Unanticipated Revenue (High Intensity Drug Traffic Grant) $38,870
FROM: Unanticipated Revenue (Internet Crimes Against Persons Grant) $12,709
FROM: Unanticipated Revenue (DUI Enforcement Grant) $11,597
FROM: Unanticipated Revenue (Seatbelt Grant) $6,988
FOR: Police Services $514,900
FOR: High Intensity Drug Traffic Grant $38,870
FOR: Internet Crimes Against Persons Grant $12,709
FOR: DUI Enforcement Grant $11,597
FOR: Seatbelt Grant $6,988
2. The Community Development & Neighborhood Services (CDNS) department has received
revenue from various sources which needs to be appropriated to cover the related expenditures. A listing
of these items follows:
a. $3,000 - National Alliance for Preservation Conference Grant - Request for an appropriation of
$1,500 in Certified Local Government (CLG) funding and $1,500 of matching grant funds from
existing City of Fort Collins appropriations. The $1,500 City match was previously
appropriated, but per the City Charter the transfer of these funds to a grant project must be
authorized by City Council. The grant awarded authorized sending two Landmark
Preservation Commission members to this national conference in Philadelphia for training and
education. A requirement of retaining CLG funding is continual education for commission
members.
b. $62,000 - CDNS Development Hourly and Overtime Reimbursement - This is a request for
hourly and overtime expenses that have been and are expected to be incurred throughout this
year in an effort to keep up with current Development Review and inspection service levels.
The department covered as much as possible through existing personal services budgets but
anticipate needing an additional $62,000 to fully cover additional expenses incurred.
Development Review revenues that have come in over projections (in excess of $1M as of
August 31, 2014) are the suggested funding source.
c. $19,800 – Loomis Addition Grant – This request is for an appropriation of $9,900 in Certified
Local Government (CLG) funding and $9,900 of matching grant funds from existing City of
Fort Collins appropriations. The $9,900 City match was previously appropriated, but per the
City Charter the transfer of these funds to a grant project must be authorized by City Council.
The grant authorized the hiring of a professional consultant to develop a historic context for
the Westside's Loomis Addition. This context development is the prelude to a historic
property survey.
October 20, 2014
d. $63,785 - Paramount Cottage III Grant - Request for an appropriation of $27,109 in Certified
Local Government (CLG) funding, $26,676 of matching grant funds from the owner and
$10,000 of matching grant funds from existing City of Fort Collins appropriations. The
$10,000 City match was previously appropriated, but per the City Charter the transfer of these
funds to a grant project must be authorized by City Council. The grant awarded authorized
the final phase of rehabilitation of the Paramount Cottage Camp located at 1544 West Oak
Street.
e. $6,528 – Restorative Justice Accountability Incentive Block Grant – This is an appropriation
request for $6,528 in grant funding from the Colorado Division of Criminal Justice, Juvenile
Accountability Incentive Block Grant. No City match was required. The grant funds were
awarded to Restorative Justice Services (RJS) to purchase the equipment and supplies
needed to establish the processes and procedures for administering a new screening tool and
making appropriate referrals for youth referred to RJS from the DAs Office. The
implementation of this screening tool is intended to assure youth will receive the mental health
and substance abuse help they need to deal with issues that likely underlie their criminal
behavior. It is our hope that this support will help youth stay out of the justice system and lead
productive lives.
f. $75,000 – Development Review Integrated Voice Response System - This is a request to
purchase an Integrated Voice Response (IVR) system that integrates with Community
Development and Neighborhood Services building permitting system to automate the phone
portion of building inspection scheduling. Currently, customers leave voice mail messages
for inspection requests which then are manually transcribed by staff and entered into our
system. This request is in direct response to the added building permit and inspection service
levels that are currently being experienced related to BFO Package 132: Development
Review. It is anticipated that implementing this technology will make available an equivalent
of approximately a .75 FTE, by streamlining routine tasks allowing inspectors to focus their
time on field and enforcement work, and reducing or perhaps eliminating the need to add
further hourly staff. This improvement will also result in increased service levels and
transparency to customers who prefer to do business by phone. Development Review
revenues that have come in over projections (in excess of $1.2M as of September 30, 2014)
are the suggested funding source.
g. $78,000 – Development Review Vehicle Acquisition - This request is to purchase three
vehicles to accommodate hourly building and code enforcement staff to enable them to
perform building and zoning field inspections. We have hired three hourly building inspectors
and have transferred zoning-related field inspection work to code compliance staff due to the
increased development review and building permit service levels that are currently being
experiences related to BFO Package 132: Development Review. We anticipate an ongoing
need for these hourly inspectors for several years to come. We have redistributed all
available department vehicles and are currently renting additional vehicles to accommodate
this need. Two Chevrolet Colorado pickups and one Chevy Trax SUV are being
recommended. Development Review revenues that have come in over projections (in excess
of $1.2 M as of September, 2014) are the suggested funding source.
FROM: Unanticipated Revenue (Miscellaneous CDNS) $241,676
FROM: Unanticipated Revenue (National Alliance Preservation Grant) $1,500
FROM: Unanticipated Revenue (Loomis Addition Grant) $9,900
FROM: Unanticipated Revenue (Paramount Cottage III Grant) $27,109
FROM: Unanticipated Revenue (Restorative Justice Grant) $6,528
FROM: Transfer from Existing Operating Budgets $21,400
FOR: CDNS Hourly and Overtime Reimbursement $62,000
FOR: CDNS Technology – IVR System $75,000
FOR: CDNS Vehicle Acquisition $78,000
FOR: National Alliance Grant $3,000
FOR: Loomis Addition Grant $19,800
October 20, 2014
FOR: Paramount Cottage III Grant $63,785
FOR: Restorative Justice Accountability Incentive Block Grant $6,528
3. Operation Services is requesting to complete the Arthur ditch rehabilitation project at the Mulberry
Pool site. Previously, $500,000 was appropriated based on initial design and construction estimates.
However, after completion of the final design, it was determined that an additional $200,000 was
necessary to complete the project.
FROM: Unanticipated Revenue $200,000
FOR: Arthur Ditch Rehabilitation Project $200,000
4. Operations Services is requesting to appropriate $60,000 to perform minor building renovations
including an ADA restroom and some HVAC replacements at the Carnegie building (old museum) located
at 220 Mathews.
FROM: Unanticipated Revenue $60,000
FOR: Carnegie Building Renovations $60,000
5. This request is to appropriate $100,000 to upgrade to LED lighting fixtures at the following
facilities: Senior Center Gym, Northside Atzlan Center Gym and Parking Lot, 215 Mason Parking Lot,
and Gardens at Spring Creek Parking Lot. Operation Services anticipates to complete all upgrades
before the close of 2014.
FROM: Unanticipated Revenue $100,000
FOR: LED Light Fixture Upgrades $100,000
6. The Forestry Department request to appropriate unanticipated revenue from reimbursement
claims for damages to trees caused by accidents.
FROM: Unanticipated Revenue $3,514
FOR: Forestry Maintenance $3,514
7. The Parks department is requesting the appropriation of $25,000 that was donated by Blue
Ocean Enterprises / Richardson Foundation to the 4th of July celebration. This request appropriates
these funds for this specified purpose.
FROM: Unanticipated Revenue (Donations) $25,000
FOR: 4th of July Expenses $25,000
8. This is a request to appropriate $1,800 to help fund the acquisition of portable ramps in a joint
effort with the Downtown Development Authority (DDA). The City and DDA have been asked by a
number of Fort Collins residents to help find a solution to afford disabled access to businesses in the Old
Town Historic District. Although front door wheelchair access to many of the historic buildings within the
District is not required by federal law (Americans with Disabilities Act) or City land use code, there is a
desire to make the downtown businesses more accessible to people in wheelchairs. Business owners will
voluntarily pay $75 for a ramp, remote doorbell and accessibility sticker, the City and DDA will split the
remaining costs and delivery fee. Ramps will be portable and each business will be able to deploy a ramp
when needed and store it discreetly when not in use.
FROM: Unanticipated Revenue $1,800
FOR: Portable Downtown Ramps Acquisition $1,800
October 20, 2014
9. The Social Sustainability department requests the appropriation of $51,086 to cover expenses
related to Land Bank property maintenance needs for 2014. As expenses vary from year-to-year, funding
is requested annually mid-year to cover these costs. This Land Bank reserve request will cover the
expenses for 2014 including general maintenance of properties, raw water and sewer expenses, and
property appraisals.
FROM: Prior Year Reserves (Land Bank Reserve) $51,086
FOR: Land Bank Expenses $51,086
10. The Fort Collins Convention Center and Visitor's Bureau (FCCVB) has been awarded an $87,764
grant from the Colorado Welcome Center through the State of Colorado. These funds will be disbursed
by the State of Colorado and directed through the City of Fort Collins, pursuant to State of Colorado
requirements, then paid to the FCCVB. The grant period will run from July 1, 2014 through June 30,
2015.
FROM: Unanticipated Revenue (Grants) $87,764
FOR: Fort Collins Convention and Visitors Bureau $87,764
11. Economic Development requests the appropriation of $344,060 to cover payment of rebates
made in 2014. In accordance with Chapter 25, Article II, Division 5, Manufacturing Equipment Use Tax
Rebates were paid out in March 2014 for the 2012 rebate program. The rebate program was established
to encourage investment in new manufacturing equipment by local manufacturing firms. Vendors have
until December 31st of the following year to file for the rebate. This item appropriates the use tax funds to
cover the payment of the rebates.
FROM: Prior Year Reserves (Manufacturing Use Tax Rebate) $344,060
FOR: Manufacturing Use Tax Rebates $344,060
12. Environmental Services sells radon test kits at cost as part of its program to reduce lung cancer
risk from in-home radon exposure. This appropriation would recover kit sales revenue for the purpose of
restocking radon test kits.
FROM: Unanticipated Revenue $4,146
FOR: Radon Test Kits $4,146
13. The Gardens requests appropriations of unanticipated revenues resulting from increased
programs and popularity of the Gardens. Appropriations are needed for the additional cost of expanded
programs and needed improvements at the gardens.
FROM: Unanticipated Revenue $40,500
FOR: Gardens on Spring Creek Programs and Operations $40,500
B. CAPITAL EXPANSION FUND
1. This item appropriates administrative fee revenue earned in the Capital Expansion Fund for
transfer to the General Fund. The 2014 Budget appropriated $39,000 in administrative fees and through
August over $65,000 has actually been received. Development review revenues are currently higher than
2013 year-end actual revenues when the actual 2013 administrative fee revenue was over $80,000. Staff
is requesting the appropriation of an additional $60,000 of unanticipated revenue to enable the full
amount of administrative fees received in 2014 to be transferred to the General Fund.
October 20, 2014
FROM: Unanticipated Revenue (Administrative Fees) $60,000
FOR: Transfer to the General Fund $60,000
C. CAPITAL PROJECTS FUND
1. As part of the Harmony Road and Shields Street Intersection Improvements Project, funds were
received from the Fort Collins Loveland Water District for necessary waterline improvements. This project
has been completed and the contributed funds are needed to cover the remaining expenses.
FROM: Unanticipated Revenue (Contributions in Aid) $63,590
FOR: Harmony & Shields Intersection Improv. Project $63,590
2. As part of the Linden Street Streetscape Improvements Project, funds have been received from
the developer as a repay agreement for construction of local street improvements adjacent to their
development. The address of the developers contributing to the project is 350 Linden and the amount
contributed is $21,654. This project has been completed and the contributed funds are needed to cover
the remaining expenses.
.
FROM: Unanticipated Revenue $21,654
FOR: Linden Street Improvements Project $21,654
3. As part of the Willow Street River District Improvements Project, funds have been received from
developers as payment to construct the local street improvements adjacent to their development project.
The addresses or names of the developers contributing to the projects are 405 Linden ($9,833), Feeder
Supply ($96,928), Wolverine Farm Letterpress & Public House ($13,310), and Willow Street Lofts
($2,689).
FROM: Unanticipated Revenue (Developer Contribution) $122,760
FOR: Willow Street River District Enhancements Project $122,760
4. Ridgeview Classical School has paid the City of Ft. Collins for the future installation of sidewalk
along Welch Street in front of the school. The project is currently planned for late summer or early fall of
2015 pending any unforeseen circumstances. This item appropriates the revenue to fund the project.
FROM: Unanticipated Revenue (Developer Charges) $3,375
FOR: BOB-Pedestrian Plan & ADA Improvements Project $3,375
5. Savings from operating budgets were identified at the end of 2013 in the Transportation Services
Fund and deposited in the Capital Projects Fund. These savings are requested for appropriation to
partially cover charges identified by the FTA as ineligible for reimbursement by the Federal grant for the
MAX project. It is expected that at the close of the project, City matching funds will be available to
provide for any expenses deemed ineligible. This appropriation ensures there are additional funds
available if needed. If they are not needed, they will be returned to the Transportation Services Fund.
FROM: Unanticipated Revenue (Transfer from Transportation) $110,846
FOR: MAX Ineligible Project Expenses $110,846
6. City residents approved a 0.25 cent tax to be used to finance projects identified in the Building
Community Choices – Natural Areas and Park Improvement Capital Improvement Plan that went into
effect on January 1, 1998, and expired on December 31, 2005. Per Ordinance No. 29, 1997 “Any excess
revenues generated by the tax shall be used for natural areas and trails.” All projects in the plan have
October 20, 2014
been completed and this item transfers the remaining interest earnings from the Capital Projects Fund to
the Natural Areas Fund.
FROM: Unanticipated Revenue (Interest) $125,474
FOR: Transfer to Natural Areas Fund $125,474
7. This item appropriates unanticipated revenue received for park construction projects. The City
received unanticipated revenue from Larimer County Park Development Fees related to 2013
development that were received in 2014. This revenue will be applied towards the construction of the
Southeast Community Park.
FROM: Unanticipated Revenue (Development Fees) $33,598
FOR: Southeast Community Park Project $33,598
D. CONSERVATION TRUST FUND
1. Due to increases in constructions costs in northern Colorado over the last two years, two trail
projects are over initial budget estimates. The Trilby Underpass was estimated to cost $900,000, but
actual costs are $1,300,000 (increase of $400,000). The Poudre Trail at Lemay and Mulberry Project
was originally estimated to be $900,000, but is now estimated to be $1,200,000 (increase of $300,000).
The Conservation Trust Fund has approximately $1,000,000 in reserves. This item requests
appropriating $510,000 of reserves and $190,000 of unanticipated revenue for these projects and to
cover these additional construction costs. .
FROM: Unanticipated Revenue (Lottery Proceeds) $190,000
FROM: Prior Year Reserves $510,000
FOR: Trail Acquisition and Development (Trilby Underpass, Poudre Trail) $700,000
2. This item transfers unused appropriations in the Conservation Trust Open Space Acquisitions
Project, Fossil Creek Trail Project and Tri-City Trail Project to the Trail Acquisition /Development Project.
The Open Space Acquisitions Project will be closed at year end. Transferred funds in the Trail
Acquisition and Development Project will be used to cover unanticipated design and construction
expenses for the Poudre Trail Project.
FROM: Open Space Acquisitions Project unused appropriation $57,461
FROM: Fossil Creek Trail Project unused appropriation $90,000
FROM: Tri-City Trails Project unused appropriation $380,000
FOR: Trail Acquisition and Development Project $527,461
E. CULTURAL SERVICES AND FACILITIES FUND
1. This item appropriates $31,411 for two Art in Public Places (APP) projects: the Transformer
Cabinet
Project in the Light & Power Fund ($3,982) and the Pianos About Town Project in the Cultural Services
Fund ($27,429). Funding has been received from the Bohemian Companies - $38,492, Downtown
Development Authority - $8,000, and Downtown Business Association - $2,900. This revenue was also
for the administration of the projects ($17,981), but additional administration appropriations are not
needed in 2014.
FROM: Unanticipated Revenue (Contributions – Cultural Services
& Facilities Fund) $27,429
FROM: Unanticipated Revenue (Contributions–Light & Power Fund) $ 3,982
FOR: Art in Public Places Project (Cultural Services & Facilities Fund) $27,429
October 20, 2014
FOR: Art in Public Places Project (Light & Power Fund) $ 3,982
2. The Downtown Fort Collins Creative District was accepted as a Candidate District into the
Colorado Creative Districts Program. Creative districts are accepted into this program as "candidates"
and work toward certification for two years. This incubator-style program offers Candidate Creative
Districts benefits in the form of direct funding and professional assistance, training, and networking with
peers. Candidate districts can apply for certification at the end of two years. Each candidate district is
awarded a $5,000 grant from both the Colorado Creative Industries and the Boettcher Foundation. This
item appropriates the $10,000 in grant revenue for the District expenses.
FROM: Unanticipated Revenue (Grants) $10,000
FOR: Downtown Creative District $10,000
3. The Museum Fund was created in 2013 to segregate the City’s revenue and expenditures for the
Fort Collins Museum of Discovery which opened in November 2012. Final Museum revenue,
expenditures, and reserve balances were determined at the end of 2013. This appropriates the Museum
reserves from: Donations ($46,079), BOB Operations ($559,346), and Unassigned ($414,368), for a total
of $1,019,793 for transfer from the Cultural Services and Facilities Fund to the Museum Fund.
FROM: Prior Year Reserves (Cultural Services & Facilities Fund) $1,019,793
FOR: Transfer to the Museum Fund $1,019,793
F. GOLF FUND
1. This item is to appropriate unanticipated revenue in the Golf Fund from restructured golf
concessionaire contracts. Through the restructuring, additional revenue came into the City, but a portion
of that revenue needs to be paid to the Golf Pro concessionaires.
FROM: Unanticipated Revenue (Golf Fees) $98,000
FOR: Golf Expenses $98,000
G. KEEP FORT COLLINS GREAT FUND
1. Following approval of the Amended and Restated Intergovernmental Agreement and Revenue
Allocation Formula on July 15, 2014, it was decided that PFA would participate in the City's Annual Year-
End Adjustment Ordinance at the end of each year to appropriate the remaining KFCG balance from the
end of the prior year. Therefore, Poudre Fire Authority requests the balance in the City's KFCG reserve
fund dedicated to fire protection and other emergency services. These funds are requested to purchase
fire apparatus in 2015.
FROM: Prior Year Reserves – Fire Reserve $215,096
FOR: Poudre Fire Authority Operations $215,096
H. LIGHT AND POWER FUND
1. The 2013 appropriation which funded the Computerized Maintenance Management System
(CMMS) was based on a preliminary implementation scope and assumed that the mapping interface
would be handled after the initial implementation. As the work on CMMS has proceeded, the system
requirements grew and it became clear that the mapping interface should be an integral part of the initial
implementation. These changes have resulted in a more comprehensive CMMS implementation,
however, they have impacted the projected project cost. In order to realize all of the benefits associated
with the full implementation of CMMS along with the GIS interface an additional appropriation is being
October 20, 2014
requested for 2014. It is expected that the additional $400,000 appropriation, consisting of $100,000 from
each of the four utility Enterprise Funds, will complete the implementation in the Water Field Operations
area and the GIS connections, and result in a projected savings of at least $200,000 from less consulting
for the on-going asset management program with the Utilities Customer Service and Administration Fund
in 2014.
FROM: Prior Year Reserves $100,000
FOR: CMMS Maintenance Management $100,000
I. NATURAL AREAS FUND
1. The sales and use tax revenue received in 2013 was higher than projected and the existing
appropriations were not adequate to make the full transfer from the Sales and Use Tax Fund to the
Natural Areas Fund for the one quarter cent Natural Areas tax. (See Sales & Use Tax Fund Item #1)
This item appropriates additional funds in the amount of $492,596 transferred from the Sales and Use
Tax Fund to the Natural Areas Fund for Land Conservation expenses.
FROM: Unanticipated Revenue (Transfer In) $492,596
FOR: Natural Areas Expenses $492,596
2. City residents approved a 0.25 cent tax to be used to finance projects identified in the Building
Community Choices – Natural Areas and Park Improvement Capital Improvement Plan that went into
effect on January 1, 1998, and expired on December 31, 2005. (See Capital Project Fund item #6) This
item appropriates the transfer from the Capital Projects Fund into the Natural Areas Fund for trail
expenses.
FROM: Unanticipated Revenue (Transfer In) $125,474
FOR: Natural Areas Trails Expense $125,474
J. RECREATION FUND
1. Adult Fitness and Child Development programs at the North Aztlan Center have seen a
significant participation increase in 2014. An increase in demand for the number of programs offered
results in increased cost, off-set by revenue generated by registrations and drop-in fees.
FROM Unanticipated Revenue $27,242
FOR: Recreation Programs $27,242
K. SALES AND USE TAX FUND
1. The sales and use tax revenue received in 2013 was higher than projected and the existing
appropriations were not adequate to make the full transfer from the Sales and Use Tax Fund to the
Capital Projects Fund for the one quarter cent Building on Basics tax, and to the Natural Areas Fund for
the one quarter cent Natural Areas tax. Adjustments to the General Fund, the Keep Fort Collins Great
Fund and the Transportation Services Fund are not needed because the tax revenues are recorded
directly into those funds. This item appropriates additional funds in the amount of $985,192 from prior
year reserves to increase the transfer from the Sales and Use Tax Fund to the Capital Projects Fund for
the Building on Basics tax by $492,596, and to increase the transfer to the Natural Areas Fund for the
Natural Areas tax by $492,596.
FROM: Prior Year Reserves (Sales & Use Tax Fund) $985,192
FOR: Transfer to Capital Projects - Building on Basics $492,596
FOR: Transfer to Natural Areas Fund $492,596
October 20, 2014
L. STORMWATER FUND
1. This item appropriates 1% of the West Vine Channel Outfall project in the amount of $6,125 for
Art in Public Places. The total capital project was appropriated in November, 2013 Ordinance No. 156
but did not include the Art in Public Places appropriation. Of the $6,125, 78% remains in the Stormwater
Fund for the artwork ($4,778) and 22% is transferred to the Cultural Services and Facilities Fund for
operations ($1,225) and for maintenance ($122). This is funded from the Stormwater Fund Reserves.
FROM: Prior Year Reserves $6,125
FOR: Art in Public Places Project – Stormwater Fund $4,778
FOR: APP Project - Transfer to Cultural Services & Facilities Fund $1,347
2. The 2013 appropriation which funded the Computerized Maintenance Management System
(CMMS) was based on a preliminary implementation scope and assumed that the mapping interface
would be handled after the initial implementation. As the work on CMMS has proceeded, the system
requirements grew and it became clear that the mapping interface should be an integral part of the initial
implementation. These changes have resulted in a more comprehensive CMMS implementation,
however, they have impacted the projected project cost. In order to realize all of the benefits associated
with the full implementation of CMMS along with the GIS interface an additional appropriation is being
requested for 2014. It is expected that the additional $400,000 appropriation, consisting of $100,000 from
each of the four utility Enterprise Funds, will complete the implementation in the Water Field Operations
area and the GIS connections, and result in a projected savings of at least $200,000 from less consulting
for the on-going asset management program with the Utilities Customer Service and Administration Fund
in 2014.
FROM: Prior Year Reserves $100,000
FOR: CMMS Maintenance Management $100,000
M. TIMBERLINE/PROSPECT SID #94 FUND
1. The SID was established in 2007 and payments are being made over 10 years. The City bills
annually and forwards payments to a developer who fronted initial capital for the improvements. In 2014
revenues exceeded projects due to early payoffs made by property owners thus an appropriation is
needed to forward payment to the developer
FROM: Unanticipated Revenue $60,048
FOR: Timberline/Prospect SID #94 Expenses $60,048
N. TRANSIT SERVICES FUND
1. The City of Fort Collins has entered into agreements with each of its three Transportation
Management Area (TMA) partners (Loveland, Berthoud, & the NFRMPO) to transfer local funds to the
partners in exchange for the partner's allocation of federal formula funding. These agreements are
specific to Federal Fiscal Year (FFY) 2013 FTA Section 5307 and Section 5339 formula grants. This
request for additional appropriations to match the sum of the agreed-upon local funds exchange is fully
funded with additional federal funding.
FROM: Unanticipated Revenue (Grants) $657,531
FOR: Pass-Thru Funding to Transportation Management Area $657,531
October 20, 2014
O. TRANSPORTATION SERVICES FUND
1. FC Moves was awarded a $10,667 grant from The Denver Foundation (Kaiser Permanente) for
the Fort Collins Walk and Wheel Demonstration Project. This funding will be used to design and
implement a temporary protected bike lane demonstration project in 2015. Project site selection and
planning will occur in late 2014. Funding will also be used for project evaluation to help inform future
bikeway design across the City. This item appropriates the funds that have been received by the City.
FROM: Unanticipated Revenue (Contribution) $10,667
FOR: FC Moves Program $10,667
P. WASTEWATER FUND
1. The 2013 appropriation which funded the Computerized Maintenance Management System
(CMMS) was based on a preliminary implementation scope and assumed that the mapping interface
would be handled after the initial implementation. As the work on CMMS has proceeded, the system
requirements grew and it became clear that the mapping interface should be an integral part of the initial
implementation. These changes have resulted in a more comprehensive CMMS implementation,
however, they have impacted the projected project cost. In order to realize all of the benefits associated
with the full implementation of CMMS along with the GIS interface an additional appropriation is being
requested for 2014. It is expected that the additional $400,000 appropriation, consisting of $100,000 from
each of the four utility Enterprise Funds, will complete the implementation in the Water Field Operations
area and the GIS connections, and result in a projected savings of at least $200,000 from less consulting
for the on-going asset management program with the Utilities Customer Service and Administration Fund
in 2014.
FROM: Prior Year Reserves $100,000
FOR: CMMS Maintenance Management $100,000
Q. WATER FUND
1. The 2013 appropriation which funded the Computerized Maintenance Management System
(CMMS) was based on a preliminary implementation scope and assumed that the mapping interface
would be handled after the initial implementation. As the work on CMMS has proceeded, the system
requirements grew and it became clear that the mapping interface should be an integral part of the initial
implementation. These changes have resulted in a more comprehensive CMMS implementation,
however, they have impacted the projected project cost. In order to realize all of the benefits associated
with the full implementation of CMMS along with the GIS interface an additional appropriation is being
requested for 2014. It is expected that the additional $400,000 appropriation, consisting of $100,000 from
each of the four utility Enterprise Funds, will complete the implementation in the Water Field Operations
area and the GIS connections, and result in a projected savings of at least $200,000 from less consulting
for the on-going asset management program with the Utilities Customer Service and Administration Fund
in 2014.
FROM: Prior Year Reserves $100,000
FOR: CMMS Maintenance Management $100,000
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
First Reading of Ordinance No. 2014, Appropriating Prior Year Reserves in the Benefits Fund to
be Used for Unanticipated Expenditure Increases
October 20, 2014
Medical claims grew approximately 6% a year from 2009 through 2012. In 2013, claims increased 9%
over 2012. In looking at the first eight months of 2014, the growth in medical claims is trending toward
another increase of 9% or more, compared to 2013. Claims expenditures are anticipated to exceed
budgeted appropriations by $1.3M Additional appropriations are also needed to cover unanticipated
increases in other employee benefits, including Long-Term Disability, Life Insurance premiums, FPPA
premiums and increased participation by employees in Flex Spending accounts (medical & daycare).
An additional appropriation of approximately $1,850K is requested from reserves in the Benefits Fund.
The Benefits Fund ended 2013 with a balance of $10.5M, above the targeted minimum balance of $6M.
Similar to the Transportation Fund, if the additional appropriations requested are not expended, it will
accrue to the Benefits Fund reserves.
FROM: Prior Years Reserves $1,850,000
FOR: Benefit Fund Expenses $1,850,000
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
First Reading of Ordinance No. , 2014, Appropriating Prior Year Reserves in the Transportation
Fund for Snow Removal
The budget for snow removal is based on the historical average annual cost of snow removal which is
$1.5M. A contributing factor to the shortfall in 2014 is the 2013 calendar year snow and ice season.
Deicing product was purchased in 2013 for the 2013-2014 snow season. The supply was depleted due to
the severity and number of storms in winter 2013. The first quarter of 2014 was an above average snow
season and many of the storms were multi-day and/or weekend events which added to the total cost of
snow removal. The entire snow removal budget of $1.3M for 2014 has been spent.
As is anticipated in heavy snow years, additional funding is being requested within the Annual Year-End
Adjustment Ordinance using existing Transportation Fund reserves. The Transportation Fund ended
2013 with a balance of $15M of which $5.1M is available for additional costs such as this. If there are
remaining funds, they will return to the Transportation Fund reserves.
FROM: Prior Years Reserves $800,000
FOR: Snow removal in the Transportation Fund $800,000
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
First Reading of Ordinance No. , 2014, Appropriating Prior Year Reserves in the Self-Insurance
Fund for Insurance Expenses.
Workers Compensation claims and Property Liability claims are budgeted based on the average claims
over the past several years. As the charts below illustrate, claims very significantly from year to year.
Property & Liability Claim Payments
October 20, 2014
Property and Liability payments year to date of $322K compare to a full year budget of $450K. Because
of several events during the year, Staff anticipates total payments will be approximately $596K and
exceed budget by $274K. Property & Liability claims are expected to exceed budget driven by:
• $195K loss on two large dump trucks that were totaled in 2014
• $150K from oil & gas litigation costs that were not included in the budget
• $70K loss from two police vehicles that were totaled in 2014
Workers Compensation Claim Payments
Workers Compensation payments year to date are essentially at the full year budget of $750K. The
average annual payment over the past 5 years is $733k. Forecasting claims payments is difficult, as
illustrated by $447K of the year to date payments are for claims from prior years and the historical
volatility in annual payments. Staff anticipates total payments for workers compensation will be
approximately $1,122K and exceed budget by $336K.
October 20, 2014
The Self Insurance Fund ended 2013 with a $3.6M fund balance of which $2.8M is surplus. Additional
funding of approximately $610K will be requested from the Self Insurance Fund and if not expended will
be returned at year end.
FROM: Prior Years Reserves $610,000
FOR: Workers Compensation $336,000
FOR: Property and Liability $274,000
ATTACHMENTS
None
1
City of Fort Collins 2014
Annual Adjustment Ordinance
October 20, 2014
Council Finance Committee Meeting
2
Annual Adjustment Ordinance – Purpose and Scope
- Previously called the “Clean-Up Ordinance”
- Guidelines for what may be included:
• 2014 unanticipated revenues (e.g. grants)
• Appropriation of unassigned reserves to fund
unanticipated expenditures associated with approved
expenses related to 2014 appropriations
• Should be routine and non-controversial
• Items approved by the ordinance should be spent within
the calendar year (i.e. by December 31, 2014
3
Summary of Ordinances
- City-wide Ordinance No. , 2014 increases total City
2014 appropriations by $7,170,119
• This Ordinance increases General Fund 2014
appropriations by $1,789,647 including the use of
$446,826 in prior year reserves
• Funding for the total City appropriations is:
o $2,858,171 from additional revenue
o $3,583,032 from prior year reserves
o $728,916 transferred from other funds
4
Summary of Ordinances
- Ordinance No. , 2014 increases Benefits Fund 2014
appropriations by $1,850,000
• Coming solely from Benefit Fund reserves
- Ordinance No. , 2014 increases Transportation Fund
2014 appropriations by $800,000
• Coming solely from Transportation Fund reserves
- Ordinance No. , 2014 increases Self Insurance Fund
2014 appropriations by $610,000
• Coming solely from Self Insurance Fund reserves
These three items were reviewed by the Council
Finance Committee during their September meeting
5
Questions
October 20, 2014
COUNCIL FINANCE COMMITTEE
AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY
Staff: Jessica Ping-Small, Revenue and Project Manager
Mike Beckstead, Chief Financial Officer,
Date: October 20, 2014
SUBJECT FOR DISCUSSION
Appropriating General Fund Revenue for the purpose of rebating Development Fees to
Woodward, Inc., in support of their expansion at the corner of Lincoln Avenue and Lemay
Avenue.
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
The ordinance appropriates $88,343.19 of General Revenue Funds for a rebate of Development
Fees approved by City Council on April 2, 2013 (Ordinance 055, 2013); Vote: 6-1; Nay:
Ohlson). The ordinance approved an agreement between the City, Downtown Development
Authority (DDA), and Woodward, Inc. The agreement provides Business Investment Assistance
for the relocation of Woodward’s headquarters as well as an expansion of their manufacturing
and office facilities to a new location at the corner of Lincoln Avenue and Lemay Avenue. The
project will retain or create between 1,400 and 1,700 primary jobs in the City. The City’s
assistance includes a rebate of Use Tax, Development Fees, and Capital Improvement Fees.
GENERAL DIRECTION SOUGHT AND SPECIFIC QUESTIONS TO BE ANSWERED
N/A
BACKGROUND/DISCUSSION
Agreement Summary
On April 2, 2013, City Council passed an ordinance (Ordinance 055, 2013; Vote: 6-1; Nay:
Ohlson) approving an Economic Development Project Agreement (“Agreement”) between the
City, the DDA, and Woodward, Inc.
The agreement specifies Woodward is eligible for a rebate in three areas:
• Use Tax on Construction Materials and Eligible Equipment (up to 80%)
• Development Fees (100%)
• Capital Improvement Fees (up to 50%)
October 20, 2014
Use Tax
Woodward plans to invest approximately $169.1 million in new buildings and $50.5 million in
new equipment as part of the Project. As outlined in the Agreement, City Council will rebate 80
percent of the use tax collected in connection with these investments. The rebate will include
approximately $2.6 million of the total $3.3 million due on construction materials and $1.2
million of the total $1.4 million due on eligible equipment.
The use tax rebate on both Construction Materials and Eligible Equipment go beyond the general
fund portion of the use tax rate. As a result, the general fund must bear the additional cost of the
rebate to avoid impacting revenue associated with the dedicated use tax (e.g., Open Space, Street
Maintenance, Building on Basics, and Keep Fort Collins Great). This additional cost will be
backfilled from the revenue generated by indirect and induced economic impacts to the
community.
Development Fees
As stated in the agreement, City Council will rebate 100 percent of the applicable Development
Review Fees (e.g., Plan Check, and Base Building Permit Fee). The final rebate amount will be
approximately $300,000.
Capital Improvement Fees
As part of the Agreement, City Council will rebate 50 percent of the applicable Capital
Expansion, Street Oversizing and Utility Plant Investment fees due for the Project.
The rebate will include approximately $3.0 million of the total estimated $5.4 million due. These
fees are collected to offset the cost each new project imposes on the capital infrastructure within
the City. As a result, the cost of the rebate must be backfilled from the revenue generated by
indirect and induced economic impacts to the community. The backfilled revenue will make each
capital fund whole.
Employment Level Requirements
The three rebate categories were offered with the stipulation that employment levels must reach
or exceed 1,400 employees within the City by December 31, 2018.
• If a rebate request is made prior to December 31, 2018, the City will withhold 40% of the
rebate until set employment levels have been met.
• If the target employment level is reached after December 31, 2018 but before December
31, 2020, Woodward will receive the retained 40 percent less $500,000 (combined
between use tax and development fee rebates).
• Woodward will not be entitled to the remaining 40 percent if the target level is not
reached by December 31, 2020.
October 20, 2014
Rebate Summary
Rebate Schedule as agreed upon with Woodward
• Two applications per year
• Application 1 includes:
• January through June Development Review and Capital Improvement Fees
• Application 2 includes:
• June through December Development Review and Capital Improvement Fees
• January through December Use Tax
Key Stipulations
• Of the rebate amounts eligible, 40% will be withheld in escrow dependent on Woodward
reaching the 1,400 employee mark by 12/31/18.
• Use tax and Capital Expansion fees include a backfill requirement by the General Fund
which will be accounted for at the time of appropriation.
• 100% of the Capital Improvement Fee rebate will be backfilled by the General
Fund
• 100% of the dedicated taxes will be backfilled by the General Fund
• .25% Natural Areas
• .25% Streets and Transportation
• .25% Building on Basics Projects
• .85% Keep Fort Collins Great
• Rebate funds will be appropriated by City Council biannually as part of the rebate
process.
Current Rebate Due for Period January 1, 2013 – June 30, 2014
Development Fee rebate due of $88,343.19.
First Rebate Payment
(1/1/13-6/30/14)
Development
Fees
100%
Capital
Improvement
Fees
50%
Use Tax
80%*
Not Eligible
for Rebate
Total
Total Fees Collected $147,238.65 $0.00 $0.00 $2,099.50 $149,338.15
Rebate Owed 147,238.65 0.00 0.00 N/A 147,238.65
Rebate Eligible for
Payment - 60% 88,343.19 0.00 0.00 N/A 88,343.19
Rebate in Escrow - 40% 58,895.46 0.00 0.00 N/A 58,895.46
Backfill Requirement 0.00 0.00 0.00 N/A 0.00
*Use Tax Rebate only paid once per year.
October 20, 2014
ATTACHMENTS
Power Point Presentation
1
Woodward Rebate
Council Finance Committee
October 20, 2014
2
Woodward Rebate Summary
• Rebates Allowed Per the Agreement
Use Tax on Construction Materials and Eligible Equipment
(up to 80%)
Development Fees (100%)
Capital Improvement Fees (up to 50%)
Not Eligible – County use tax, mailings, etc.
• Rebates Schedule as agreed upon w/Woodward
2 applications per year
Application 1 – Covers January - June
Includes Development Review and Capital Improvement
Fees
Application 2 Includes:
June-December – Dev. Review and Cap. Imp. Fees
January-December – Use Tax
3
Woodward Rebate Summary
• Key Stipulations
Of the rebate amounts eligible, 40% will be
withheld in escrow dependent on Woodward
reaching the 1,400 employee mark by 12/31/18
Use tax and Capital Expansion fees include a
backfill requirement by the General Fund
Accounted for at time of appropriation
Rebate funds will be appropriated by City Council
biannually as part of the rebate process
4
Current Rebate Due
For Period Jan. 1, 2013 – June 30, 2014
• Development Fee rebate due of $88,343
• On City Council Agenda - November 4, 2014
First Rebate Payment
(1/1/13-6/30/14)
Development
Fees
100%
Capital
Improvement
Fees
50%
Use Tax
80%*
Not Eligible
for Rebate
Total
Total Fees Collected $147,238.65 $0.00 $0.00 $2,099.50 $149,338.15
Rebate Owed 147,238.65 0.00 0.00 N/A 147,238.65
Rebate Eligible for
Payment - 60% 88,343.19 0.00 0.00 N/A 88,343.19
Rebate in Escrow - 40% 58,895.46 0.00 0.00 N/A 58,895.46
Backfill Requirement 0.00 0.00 0.00 N/A 0.00
*Use Tax Rebate only paid once per year
5
Next Rebate Due - Q1 2015
For Period July 1, 2014 – Dec. 31, 2014
Eligible Fee Rebate
7/1/14-Current
Dev. Fees
100%
Capital
Improvement
Fees
50%
Use Tax
80%
Not
Eligible for
Rebate
Total
Total Fees Collected $173,749.16 $1,403,082.77 $1,894,260.88 $294,250.00 $3,765,342.81
Rebate Owed 173,749.16 701,541.39 $1,515,408.70 N/A 2,390,699.25
Rebate Eligible for
Payment - 60% 104,249.50 420,924.83 $909,245.22 N/A 1,434,419.55
Rebate in Escrow - 40% 69,499.66 280,616.55 606,163.48 N/A 956,279.70
Backfill Requirement 0.00 701,541.39 628,786.60 N/A 1,330,327.99
__ sq ft X $0.25 =
Size of the development (area being plaited or ifnot being
platted size of parcel accompanying all development
improvements) $250 per acre acres X $ 250 =
Project fee $2,000 each
# of units X $160 =
Multifamily or other residential units $115 per unit
# of units X $115 =
Project Development Plan (PDP) or Basic Development Review
Project requiring Transportation Services Review and/or utility plan review.
This fee includes 3 rounds of review.
Detached Single Family $160 per unit
o
# of dedications X $250 =
Dedication of Easement(s) and/or Right(s)-of-Way ***
Vacation of Right(s)-of-Way *** # of vacations
X$400=
X$800=
o Vacation of Easement(s) *** # of vacations
o
L
o Road Projects ___ acres (of roadway) X $3,500 =
o Wireless Telecommunication Equipment (WTE) $65 each
$158 each
$2,500 each
$200 each
$200 each
o Minor Amendment
o Major Amendment
ORe-zone
o Modification to Land Use Code
Themaximumfeeforeachannexationdocument!filingshallbe$2,000
o Annexation $20 X acres = +$250
$1000 each
$ 500 each
Fee structure amount due
o Overall Development Plan (ODP) $500 each
o Final Development Plan (FOP)
This fee includes 2 rounds of review
o Additional round of review
Type of Submittal
Please indicate the type of application submitted by checking the box
preceding the appropriate request(s).
Project Name:
Project Location: Date: _
Date Received/ Paid _
Total Amount Paid _
~ortCoUins City of Transportation Development Review Fee
/~
75 Concept review
$350 * sq root
of acres
76 Technical review
$350 * sq root
of acres
77 Rezoning petition $800-$1,000 $250 - $650 $977
$500 - $1000
+$5/acre (c)
$750 +
$10/acre $500
78 Services expansion $1 per sq ft
79 Sign posting $750 $344 $50