Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2020-012-01/21/2020-ACCEPTING AND ADOPTING THE COLLEGE AND DRAKE EXISTING CONDITIONS SURVEY, MAKING FINDINGS DETERMININGDraft Report College and Drake URA Existing Conditions Survey Prepared for: City of Fort Collins Urban Renewal Authority Prepared by: Economic & Planning Systems, Inc. September 5, 2018 EPS #173061 EXHIBIT A Table of Contents 1. INTRODUCTION ...................................................................................................... 1 Purpose ................................................................................................................. 1 Colorado Urban Renewal Law .................................................................................... 1 Methodology .......................................................................................................... 3 2. STUDY AREA ANALYSIS ............................................................................................ 4 Study Area ............................................................................................................. 4 Field Survey Approach ............................................................................................. 7 Blight Factor Evaluation Criteria ................................................................................ 7 Results of Field Survey ............................................................................................ 9 Other Considerations ............................................................................................. 12 3. CONCLUSIONS ..................................................................................................... 16 List of Tables Table 1 Parcels Contained in the URA Study Area ........................................................... 4 Table 2 Visual Conditions of Blight Observed ............................................................... 10 Table 3 Nuisance Violations, 2013-2018 ..................................................................... 12 Table 4 Police Incidents and Offenses, 2015-2018 ........................................................ 14 Table 5 Blight Conditions Image Reference, 1-30 ......................................................... 29 Table 6 Blight Conditions Image Reference, 31-60 ....................................................... 30 Table 7 Blight Conditions Image Reference, 61-90 ....................................................... 31 Table 8 Blight Conditions Image Reference, 91-113 ...................................................... 32 List of Figures Figure 1 College and Drake Proposed URA Boundary and Parcels ....................................... 6 Figure 2 Study Area Nuisance Code Violations, January 2013 – August 2018 ..................... 13 Figure 3 Image Location Reference Map ....................................................................... 18 Economic & Planning Systems, Inc. 1 173061-DRAFT-Fort Collins URA Existing Conditions 9-5-18 1. INTRODUCTION In July of 2018, Economic & Planning Systems (EPS), working with the City of Fort Collins Urban Renewal Authority (URA), conducted the following existing conditions survey (Survey) of the proposed College and Drake Urban Renewal Plan Area (Study Area). This proposed plan area is a portion of the College Midtown Corridor and is bounded by South College Avenue to the east, West Thunderbird Drive to the south, McClelland Drive to the west, and the north exterior wall of the vacant K-Mart property to the north, as shown in Figure 1. The Fort Collins Urban Renewal Authority (URA) anticipates creating a new plan area around Drake Road and College Avenue to support redevelopment plans for two large sites - the vacant former K-Mart located north of Drake, and the Spradley-Barr Mazda auto dealership located south of Drake. The proposed Urban Renewal Area captures these redevelopment plans and, if approved, will aide in the redevelopment and public improvement of the area. Purpose The primary purpose of this Survey is to determine whether the Study Area qualifies as a “blighted area” within the meaning of Colorado Urban Renewal Law. Secondly, this Survey will influence whether the Study Area should be recommended to be established as a URA Plan Area for such urban renewal activities as the URA and City Council deem appropriate. Colorado Urban Renewal Law The requirements for the establishment of a URA plan are outlined in the Colorado Urban Renewal Law, Colorado Revised Statutes (C.R.S.) § 31‐25‐101 et seq. In order to establish an area for urban renewal, there are an array of conditions that must be documented to establish a condition of blight. The determination that constitutes a blighted area depends upon the presence of several physical, environmental, and social factors. Blight is attributable to a multiplicity of conditions which, in combination, tend to accelerate the phenomenon of deterioration of an area. The definition of a blighted area in the Urban Renewal Law is as follows: College and Drake URA Existing Conditions Survey September 5, 2018 Economic & Planning Systems, Inc. 2 Draft Report Urban Renewal Law Blight Factors (C.R.S. § 31-25-103) “’Blighted area’ means an area that, in its present condition and use and, by reason of the presence of at least four of the following factors, substantially impairs or arrests the sound growth of the municipality, retards the provision of housing accommodations, or constitutes an economic or social liability, and is a menace to the public health, safety, morals, or welfare: (a) Slum, deteriorated, or deteriorating structures; (b) Predominance of defective or inadequate street layout; (c) Faulty lot layout in relation to size, adequacy, accessibility, or usefulness; (d) Unsanitary or unsafe conditions; (e) Deterioration of site or other improvements; (f) Unusual topography or inadequate public improvements or utilities; (g) Defective or unusual conditions of title rendering the title nonmarketable; (h) The existence of conditions that endanger life or property by fire or other causes; (i) Buildings that are unsafe or unhealthy for persons to live or work in because of building code violations, dilapidation, deterioration, defective design, physical construction, or faulty or inadequate facilities; (j) Environmental contamination of buildings or property; (k.5) The existence of health, safety, or welfare factors requiring high levels of municipal services or substantial physical underutilization or vacancy of sites, buildings, or other improvements; or (l) If there is no objection by the property owner or owners and the tenant or tenants of such owner or owners, if any, to the inclusion of such property in an urban renewal area, “blighted area” also means an area that, in its present condition and use and, by reason of the presence of any one of the factors specified in paragraphs (a) to (k.5) of this subsection (2), substantially impairs or arrests the sound growth of the municipality, retards the provision of housing accommodations, or constitutes an economic or social liability, and is a menace to the public health, safety, morals, or welfare. For purposes of this paragraph (l), the fact that an owner of an interest in such property does not object to the inclusion of such property in the urban renewal area does not mean that the owner has waived any rights of such owner in connection with laws governing condemnation.” Use of Eminent Domain In order for an Urban Renewal Authority to use the powers of eminent domain to acquire properties, 5 of the 11 blight factors must be present (C.R.S. § 31‐25‐ 105.5(a)). “’Blighted area’ shall have the same meaning as set forth in section 31‐25‐103 (2); except that, for the purposes of this section only, “blighted area” means an area that, in its present condition and use and, by reason of the presence of at least five of the factors specified in section 31‐25‐103 (2)(a) to (2)(l), substantially impairs or arrests the sound growth of the municipality, retards the provision of housing accommodations, or constitutes an economic or social liability, and is a menace to the public health, safety, morals, or welfare.” College and Drake URA Existing Conditions Survey September 5, 2018 Economic & Planning Systems, Inc. 3 Draft Report Methodology This Survey was completed by EPS to inventory and establish the existing conditions within the Study Area through data gathering and field observations of physical conditions. The Study Area was defined by the URA to encompass the proposed redevelopment on two large properties north and south of Drake Street. The Study Area extends to include a number of adjacent commercial properties within the two block Study Area, as well as the public streets to the east, west, and south (College, McClelland, and West Thunderbird) and the Transport MAX station, along with associated park and ride spaces. An inventory of parcels within the Study Area was compiled using parcel data from the Larimer County Assessor documenting parcel ownership, use, vacancy, and assessed value. A series of Study Area maps were then developed to facilitate the field survey, which documented and photographed visual conditions of blight. The field survey was conducted by EPS in July of 2018. The 11 factors of blight in the state statute were broken down into “conditions” - existing situations or circumstances identified in the Study Area that may qualify as blight under each of the 11 factors. The conditions documented in this report are submitted as evidence to support a “finding of blight” according to Urban Renewal Law. Under the Urban Renewal Law, the final determination of blight within the Study Area is within the sole discretion of the Fort Collins City Council. Urban Renewal Case Law In addition to the State statute, several principles have been developed by Colorado courts to guide the determination of whether an area constitutes a blighted area under the Urban Renewal Law. The following parameters have been established through case law for determining blight and the role of judiciary review. Tracy v. City of Boulder (Colo. Ct. App. 1981) • Upheld the definition of blight presented in the Urban Renewal Law as a broad condition encompassing not only those areas containing properties so dilapidated as to justify condemnation as nuisances, but also envisioning the prevention of deterioration. Therefore, the existence of widespread nuisance violations and building condemnation is not required to designate an area blighted. • Additionally, the determination of blight is the responsibility of the legislative body and a court’s role in review is to verify if the conclusion is based upon factual evidence determined by the City Council at the time of a public hearing to be consistent with the statutory definition. Interstate Trust Building Co. v. Denver Urban Renewal Authority (Colo. 1970) • Determined that blight assessment is not on a building-to-building basis, but is based on conditions observed throughout the plan area as a whole. The presence of one well maintained building does not defeat a determination that an area constitutes a blighted area. Economic & Planning Systems, Inc. 4 173061-DRAFT-Fort Collins URA Existing Conditions 9-5-18 2. STUDY AREA ANALYSIS S t udy Area The proposed College and Drake Urban Renewal Plan Area is comprised of 13 parcels on approximately 30 acres of land, as shown in Table 1. Table 1 Parcels Contained in the URA Study Area The 13 parcels are separated into the two major assemblages for redevelopment and six smaller holdings summarized below and shown in Figure 1: • Parcels 1 and 2: Dillon Companies, Inc. – Parcels 1 and 2 comprising 11.2 acres of land are owned by Dillon Companies, a real estate subsidiary of King Soopers which is wholly owned by the Kroger Company. Parcel 1 is the north portion of a vacant retail center formerly occupied by Cricket, Advantage, and Radio Shack. Parcel 2 is the southern portion of the vacant center formerly occupied by KMart as well as an occupied Loaf and Jug convenience and gas outlet on the Drake Road frontage. It also contains 60 parking spaces under an easement to Transport MAX for park and ride spaces. • Parcel 3: City of Fort Collins – Parcel 3 is a 34,100 square foot parcel behind (west of) the former KMart, owned by the City of Fort Collins for the MAX station and associated right-of- way. • Parcel 4: Dillon Companies, Inc. – This retail strip is owned by Dillon Companies and contains a 4,800 square foot building leased to Larkburger, Cricket, and a Waxing Salon. • Parcel 5: Round Top Investments, LLC. – This 24,700 square foot parcel contains a Jiffy Lube auto service center on the northwest corner of the intersection of College and Drake. • Parcels 6 and 7: Dracol, LLC. – These parcels, comprising 5.7 acres of land, contain the existing Spradley-Barr Mazda dealership buildings and lots. The property is proposed to be redeveloped as a mixed use project, including a hotel and multifamily apartments with ground level retail space. Reference Number Parcel Number Address Year Built Owner Business Name Sq. Ft. Land Occupancy Sq. Ft. Building Assessed Value 1 9723410004 2505 S College Ave 1972 Dillon Companies Inc. Cricket, Advantage, Radio Shack 92,698 Vacant 9,911 $1,180,165 2 9723410002 2445 S College Ave 1977 Dillon Companies Inc. K-Mart, Texaco Convenience Store 395,708 Vacant 90,664 $3,953,874 3 9723400908 City of Fort Collins 34,057 Vacant 0 $500 4 9723410001 2539 S College Ave 2009 Dillon Companies Inc. Larkburger, Cricket, Waxing the City 19,000 Occupied 4,785 $818,790 5 9723412001 2549 S College Ave 1980 Round Top Investments, LLC. Jiffy Lube 24,706 Occupied 2,968 $623,790 6 9726114001 2601 S College Ave 1966 Dracol, LLC. Spradley-Barr Auto Dealership 173,504 Occupied 7,184 $1,855,072 7 9726100023 2601 S College Ave 1973 Dracol, LLC. Spradley-Barr Auto Dealership 73,486 Occupied 0 $413,809 8 9726100016 2627 S College Ave 1966 Dracol, LLC. Sherwin Williams Paints 21,698 Occupied 14,790 $1,153,769 9 9726120001 Dracol, LLC. Vacant Land 4,000 Vacant 0 $22,000 10 9726120002 132 W Thunderbird Dr 1969 Dracol, LLC. Tri City Paint 13,224 Vacant 2,160 $275,068 11 9726127003 2633 S College Ave 1995 Plutus Holdings, LLC. Critter Vet 12,815 Occupied 3,125 $410,050 12 9726127004 2631 S College Ave 1975 Enchante Enterprises, LLC. Enchante Salon 13,332 Occupied 3,047 $525,400 13 9726127001 2635 S College Ave 1976 Brien Buell (Trust) Tortilla Marissas 14,052 Occupied 2,008 $450,072 Source: Larimer County Assessor; Economic & Planning Systems I:\Data\GIS\173061-Fort Collins URA\Exports\[URA Parcels.xls]T-URA Parcels Format College and Drake URA Existing Conditions Survey September 5, 2018 Economic & Planning Systems, Inc. 5 Draft Report • Parcels 8 and 9: Dracol, LLC. – Parcel 8 is 21,700 square feet and contains a Sherwin- Williams paint store with frontage on College Avenue. Parcel 9 is a 4,000 square foot vacant, interior lot. Both parcels are owned by Dracol. • Parcel 10: Dracol, LLC. – This 13,200 square foot parcel contains a 2,200 square foot vacant building formerly occupied by Tri City Paint. • Parcel 11: Plutus Holdings, LLC. – This 12,800 square foot parcel is owned by Plutus Holdings and is occupied by Critter Vet Clinic. • Parcel 12: Enchante Enterprises, LLC. – This 13,300 square foot parcel is owned by Enchante Enterprises, LLC, which is affiliated with the Enchante Salon occupying the 3,000 square foot building. • Parcel 13: Brian Buell (Trust) – Tortilla Marissas operates a 2,000 square foot building on this parcel owned by Brien Buell (Trust) on the northwest corner of College and West Thunderbird Drive. College and Drake URA Existing Conditions Survey September 5, 2018 Economic & Planning Systems, Inc. 6 Draft Report Figure 1 College and Drake Proposed URA Boundary and Parcels College and Drake URA Existing Conditions Survey September 5, 2018 Economic & Planning Systems, Inc. 7 Draft Report F i e l d Survey Approach The following assessment is based on a field survey conducted by EPS in July 2018. The survey team walked the entire Study Area, taking notes and photographs to document existing conditions corresponding to the blight factor evaluation criteria detailed in the following section. The location of each documented condition of blight is identified in the Image Location Reference Map in Appendix A of this report. B l i ght Factor Evaluation Criteria This section details the conditions used to evaluate blight during the field survey. The following conditions correspond with 6 of the 11 blight factors in the Urban Renewal Law. Additional information on a number of these factors for which data was available was also collected. The remaining blight factors cannot be visually inspected and are dependent on other data sources. Given the prevalence of physically observable conditions of blight, these remaining blight factors were not investigated. Buildings The following conditions establish evidence of Urban Renewal Law blight factor “(a) slum, deteriorated, or deteriorating structures,” based on an evaluation of the overall condition and level of deterioration of structures within the plan area. • Deteriorated External Walls / Visible Foundation • Deteriorated Roof • Deteriorated Fascia/Soffits • Deteriorated Gutters/Downspouts • Deteriorated Exterior Finishes • Deteriorated Windows and Doors • Deteriorated Stairways/Fire Escapes/Loading Docks • Deteriorated Ancillary Structures Street Layout The following conditions evaluate the Urban Renewal Law blight factor ”(b) predominance of defective or inadequate street layout,” through assessment of the safety, quality, and efficiency of street layouts, site access, and internal circulation. • Inadequate Street or Alley Width / Cross-section / Geometry • Poor Provision of Streets or Unsafe Conditions for Vehicular Traffic • Poor Provision of Sidewalks/Walkways or Unsafe Conditions for Pedestrians • Insufficient Roadway Capacity Leading to Unusual Congestion • Inadequate Emergency Vehicle Access • Poor Vehicular or Pedestrian Access to Buildings or Sites • Excessive Curb Cuts / Driveways along Commercial Blocks • Poor Internal Vehicular or Pedestrian Circulation College and Drake URA Existing Conditions Survey September 5, 2018 Economic & Planning Systems, Inc. 8 Draft Report Unsafe/Unsanitary The following conditions establish evidence of Urban Renewal Law blight factor “(d) unsanitary or unsafe conditions,” by evaluating visual conditions that indicate the occurrence of activities that inhibit the safety and health of the area including, but not limited to, excessive litter, unenclosed dumpsters, and vandalism. • Floodplains or Flood Prone Areas • Inadequate Storm Drainage Systems/Evidence of Standing Water • Poor Fire Protection Facilities • Above Average Incidences of Public Safety Responses • Inadequate Sanitation or Water Systems • Existence of Contaminants or Hazardous Conditions or Materials • High or Unusual Crime Statistics • Open/Unenclosed Trash Dumpsters • Cracked or Uneven Surfaces for Pedestrians • Illegal Dumping/Excessive Litter • Vagrants/Vandalism/Graffiti/Gang Activity • Open Ditches, Holes, or Trenches in Pedestrian Areas • Poorly Lit or Unlit Areas • Insufficient Grading/Steep Slopes • Unsafe or Exposed Electrical Wire Site Improvements The following conditions evaluate the Urban Renewal Law blight factor “(e) deterioration of site or other improvements,” by evidence of overall maintenance deficiencies within the plan area including, deterioration, poorly maintained landscaping, and overall neglect. • Neglected Properties or Evidence of Maintenance Deficiencies • Deteriorated Signage or Lighting • Deteriorated Fences, Walls, or Gates • Deteriorated On-Site Parking Surfaces, Curb and Gutter, or Sidewalks • Unpaved Parking Lot (Commercial Properties) • Poor Parking Lot/Driveway Layout • Poorly Maintained Landscaping/Overgrown Vegetation Infrastructure The observation of the following infrastructure insufficiencies is evidence of Urban Renewal Law blight factor “(f) unusual topography or inadequate public improvements or utilities.” • Deteriorated Pavement, Curb, Sidewalks, Lighting, or Drainage • Lack of Pavement, Curb, Sidewalks, Lighting, or Drainage • Presence of Overhead Utilities or Billboards • Inadequate Fire Protection Facilities/Hydrants • Inadequate Sanitation or Water Systems • Unusual Topography College and Drake URA Existing Conditions Survey September 5, 2018 Economic & Planning Systems, Inc. 9 Draft Report Vacancy The following conditions are evidence of Urban Renewal Law blight factor “(k) the existence of health, safety, or welfare factors requiring high levels of municipal services or substantial physical underutilization or vacancy of sites, buildings, or other improvements.” The primary visual condition observed is building vacancy. • An Undeveloped Parcel in a Generally Urbanized Area • Disproportionately Underdeveloped Parcel • Vacant Structures • Vacant Units in Multi-Unit Structures Other Considerations The remaining five blight factors specified in the Urban Renewal Law were not investigated further due to sufficient evidence from the visual field survey supporting a condition of blight in 6 of the 11 blight factors. (c) Faulty lot layout in relation to size, adequacy, accessibility, or usefulness. (g) Defective or unusual conditions of title rendering the title nonmarketable. (h) The existence of conditions that endanger life or property by fire or other causes. (i) Buildings that are unsafe or unhealthy for persons to live or work in because of building code violations, dilapidation, deterioration, defective design, physical construction, or faulty or inadequate facilities. (j) Environmental contamination of buildings or property. Results o f F i e l d Survey This section summarizes the findings of the visual field survey of the Study Area conducted in July 2018. Table 2 on the next page documents the blight conditions observed. These conditions are then further detailed by category. Image documentation and the location of blight conditions are presented in Appendix A of this report. College and Drake URA Existing Conditions Survey September 5, 2018 Economic & Planning Systems, Inc. 10 Draft Report Table 2 Visual Conditions of Blight Observed 1.01 Deteriorated External Walls / Visible Foundation X 1.02 Deteriorated Roof X 1.03 Deteriorated Fascia/Soffits X 1.04 Deteriorated Gutters/Downspouts X 1.05 Deteriorated Exterior Finishes X 1.06 Deteriorated Windows and Doors X 1.07 Deteriorated Stairways/Fire Escapes/Loading Docks X 1.08 Deteriorated Ancillary Structures X 2.01 Inadequate Street or Alley Width / Cross-section / Geometry 2.02 Poor Provision of Streets or Unsafe Conditions for Vehicular Traffic X 2.03 Poor Provision of Sidewalks/Walkways or Unsafe Conditions for Pedestrians X 2.04 Insufficient Roadway Capacity Leading to Unusual Congestion 2.05 Inadequate Emergency Vehicle Access 2.06 Poor Vehicular or Pedestrian Access to Buildings or Sites X 2.07 Excessive Curb Cuts / Driveways along Commercial Blocks 2.08 Poor Internal Vehicular or Pedestrian Circulation X 4.01 Floodplains or Flood Prone Areas 4.02 Inadequate Storm Drainage Systems/Evidence of Standing Water X 4.03 Poor Fire Protection Facilities 4.04 Above Average Incidences of Public Safety Responses 4.05 Inadequate Sanitation or Water Systems 4.06 Existence of Contaminants or Hazardous Conditions or Materials 4.07 High or Unusual Crime Statistics 4.08 Open / Unenclosed Trash Dumpsters X 4.09 Cracked or Uneven Surfaces for Pedestrians X 4.10 Illegal Dumping / Excessive Litter X 4.11 Vagrants/Vandalism/Graffiti/Gang Activity X 4.12 Open Ditches, Holes, or Trenches in Pedestrian Areas X 4.13 Poorly lit or unlit areas 4.14 Insufficient grading/steep slopes X 4.15 Unsafe or exposed electrical wire X 5.01 Neglected Properties or Evidence of Maintenance Deficiencies X 5.02 Deteriorated Signage or Lighting X 5.03 Deteriorated Fences, Walls, or Gates 5.04 Deteriorated On-Site Parking Surfaces, Curb & Gutter, or Sidewalks X 5.05 Unpaved Parking Lot (Commercial Properties) X 5.06 Poor Parking Lot / Driveway Layout X 5.07 Poorly Maintained Landscaping / Overgrown Vegetation X 6.01 Deteriorated pavement, curb, sidewalks, lighting, or drainage X 6.02 Lack of pavement, curb, sidewalks, lighting, or drainage X 6.03 Presence of Overhead Utilities or Billboards 6.04 Inadequate Fire Protection Facilities / Hydrants 6.05 Inadequate Sanitation or Water Systems 6.06 Unusual Topography 11.04 An Undeveloped Parcel in a Generally Urbanized Area X 11.05 Disproportionately Underdeveloped Parcel X 11.06 Vacant Structures X 11.07 Vacant Units in Multi-Unit Structures X VacancyInfrastructure Conditions Observed SiteUnsanitary Improvements UnsafeLayout / StreetBuildings College and Drake URA Existing Conditions Survey September 5, 2018 Economic & Planning Systems, Inc. 11 Draft Report 1. Buildings: slum, deteriorated, or deteriorating structures All of the structures in the Study Area are commercial buildings. The most prevalent conditions observed were broken windows, cracks and deterioration in external walls, peeling exterior paint, and damaged roofs. While broken windows and major exterior wall damage were observed primarily in vacant structures, other deterioration conditions were observed throughout the Study Area. The majority of the buildings in the Study Area were constructed in the 1970s or earlier and a number of the original facades are deteriorating. 2. Street Layout: predominance of defective or inadequate street layout South College Avenue and McClelland Drive are the major north/south routes for vehicular traffic within the Study Area. Drake Road is a major arterial and provides the primary east/west connection while West Thunderbird Drive provides local site access. Throughout the Study Area, poor provisions of streets and walkways for both pedestrian and vehicular traffic were observed in the form of deteriorated safety striping, poor internal circulation, lack of sidewalks, and blocked or constrained site access. South of Drake Road, the inefficient frontage roads along South College Avenue create a hazard for both pedestrians and vehicular traffic. These frontage roads present a barrier to site access and contribute to unsafe conditions for pedestrian traffic. 3. Unsafe/Unsanitary: unsanitary or unsafe conditions Throughout the Study Area, unsafe and unsanitary conditions were documented, including open/unenclosed trash dumpsters, cracked or uneven sidewalk surfaces, illegal dumping and litter, graffiti and vandalism, exposed electrical wires, and steep slopes. The most prevalent conditions were the presence of unenclosed/open dumpsters and excessive litter, primarily in less trafficked areas. In several areas attempts to cover graffiti were evident, while in other areas some graffiti was left untreated. Vandalism in the form of broken windows was also documented in most of the vacant structures, along with excessive litter and dumping. 4. Site Improvements: deterioration of site or other improvements The deterioration and overall neglect of properties throughout the Study Area is well documented. The main conditions of site deterioration include the deterioration of signage, deteriorated parking surfaces and curbs, poorly maintained vegetation, and poor parking/driveway layouts. Most of the onsite parking areas showed major deterioration, in many cases creating a safety hazard. Overall, there was evidence that site improvements throughout the area are not being maintained. 5. Infrastructure: unusual topography or inadequate public improvements or utilities Inadequate infrastructure was observed throughout the Study Area, predominantly in the form of deteriorated or missing curbs and sidewalks. Other inadequate utility systems could not be observed visually. The majority of missing and deteriorated public improvements were located in parking lot landscaping islands and sidewalks interior to the sites that were unkempt. There are also several missing sidewalk connections. College and Drake URA Existing Conditions Survey September 5, 2018 Economic & Planning Systems, Inc. 12 Draft Report Along South College Avenue, tree roots underneath the sidewalk stonework has created unstable walking surfaces. There is evidence that asphalt was placed over top of the stonework to level the surface; however, this temporary fix is not effective and is showing signs of deterioration. 6. Vacancy: the existence of health, safety, or welfare factors requiring high levels of municipal services or substantial physical underutilization or vacancy of sites, buildings, or other improvements There is a total of 102,735 square feet of vacant buildings in the Study Area, including spaces previously occupied by KMart, Cricket, and Tri City Paint, compared to 37,907 square feet of occupied space - a 73 percent vacancy factor overall. In addition to vacant structures, the Study Area can be characterized as underutilized with an average 0.16 floor area ratio (FAR) overall (140,642 square feet of building / 892,280 square feet of land area), which is well below the average of 0.25 FAR or greater found in other segments of the College Avenue Corridor. Largely vacant or underutilized and undeveloped parcels were documented in the Study Area including Parcels 6, 7, and 9. Parcel 7 and the portion of Parcel 6 at the corner of McClelland Drive and Drake are underutilized by the existing Automobile Dealership. Parcel 9 is a small vacant parcel interior to the south block. Other Considerations The team collected and analyzed additional non‐visual information on the Study Area that contributed to the documentation of blight factors. Nuisance Violations Nuisance violations cover multiple Urban Renewal Law blight factors including, “d) Unsanitary or unsafe conditions” and “(e) Deterioration of site or other improvements.” The City of Fort Collins Neighborhood Services Department issues notices for violations of the nuisance code related to the misuse of property. From January 2013 to August 2018 the Study Area had a total of 22 nuisance violations, as shown in Table 3. Nuisance violations in the Study Area consisted of twelve unmaintained weeds violations, six outdoor storage and rubbish violations, three un- shoveled snow violations, and one noxious weeds violation, shown in Figure 2. Table 3 Nuisance Violations, 2013-2018 2013-2018 [1] Description 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 [1] Total Study Area 3 7 6 0 3 3 22 City of Fort Collins 7,037 8,634 8,684 9,387 12,094 7,674 53,510 [1] 2018 count is year to date (August 1) Source: City of Fort Collins; Economic & Planning Systems H:\173061-Fort Collins Urban Renewal Authority\Data\[173061-Nuisance Violations and Crime.xlsx]T-Nuisance Violations College and Drake URA Existing Conditions Survey September 5, 2018 Economic & Planning Systems, Inc. 13 Draft Report Figure 2 Study Area Nuisance Code Violations, January 2013 – August 2018 College and Drake URA Existing Conditions Survey September 5, 2018 Economic & Planning Systems, Inc. 14 Draft Report Crime High or unusual crime is one determining criteria for the Urban Renewal Law blight factor “(d) Unsanitary or unsafe conditions.” Fort Collins Police Services provided both incident related data and offense related data for the Study Area. Incident related data includes any and all police calls generated, regardless of whether or not a crime is committed. Offense related data pertains to only criminal offenses. There were a total of 858 police incidents and criminal offenses in the Study Area from 2015 to 2018, as shown in Table 4. Based on this data, there is no evidence of high or unusual crime in the Study Area. Table 4 Police Incidents and Offenses, 2015-2018 Transportation Evaluation criteria for the Urban Renewal Law blight factor,”(b) predominance of defective or inadequate street layout,” assess the safety, quality, and efficiency of street layouts, site access, and internal circulation. The team reviewed traffic volumes, operations, and safety related information for the intersection of College Avenue and Drake Road. The intersection is the third busiest intersection in the City and sees about 73,500 entering vehicles per day. Over the past 15 years the vehicle per day count has fluctuated between 72,000 and almost 76,000. City of Fort Collins Staff indicated that because the intersection is at capacity, any area growth over the past 15 years has relied on alternate routes thus resulting in static vehicle per day counts. Levels of Service are calculated by determining an average delay in seconds per vehicle entering the intersection, then assigning a letter grade. For College and Drake, the intersection is at a Level of Service “D” in the evening rush hour. Every entering vehicle in the afternoon rush hour has an average delay of 52 seconds in getting through the intersection. During the evening rush hour there are 6,200 entering vehicles which collectively experience a total of 90 hours of delay, which results in congestion, added emissions, and safety concerns. The national Highway Safety Manual uses a statistical evaluation to determine whether an intersection has more crashes than what would be expected given geometry and volumes. At College and Drake this evaluation expects 47 crashes per year with nine that involve some level 2015-2018 YTD Description 2015 2016 2017 2018 YTD Total Police Incidents Study Area 202 191 232 155 780 City of Fort Collins 104,202 111,149 110,590 69,499 395,440 Offenses Study Area 19 24 20 15 78 City of Fort Collins 11,696 12,227 11,836 6,994 42,753 Source: Economic & Planning Systems H:\173061-Fort Collins Urban Renewal Authority\Data\[173061-Nuisance Violations and Crime.xlsx]T-Crime College and Drake URA Existing Conditions Survey September 5, 2018 Economic & Planning Systems, Inc. 15 Draft Report of injury. The intersection has an average of about 55 crashes per year, 11 of which involve some level of injury, and four of those are considered severe (non-incapacitating or incapacitating injuries). This intersection has six extra non-injury crashes and two extra injury crashes each year. The societal costs of the extra crashes is $344,000 per year. In terms of ranking, this intersection is number seven in the City in terms extra crash costs. College and Drake URA Existing Conditions Survey September 5, 2018 Economic & Planning Systems, Inc. 16 Draft Report 3. CONCLUSIONS Based on the definition of a blighted area in the Colorado Urban Renewal Law, Colorado Revised Statutes (C.R.S.) § 31‐25‐101 et seq., and based on the field survey results of the Study Area, EPS concludes that the Study Area is a blighted area as defined in the Colorado Urban Renewal Law, Colorado Revised Statutes (C.R.S.) § 31‐25‐101 et seq. The visual field survey conducted in July 2018 documented 6 of the 11 factors of blight within the Study Area. Therefore, this blighted area, as written in the Urban Renewal Law, “substantially impairs or arrests the sound growth of the municipality, retards the provision of housing accommodations, or constitutes an economic or social liability, and is a menace to the public health, safety, morals, or welfare.” Evidence of the following Urban Renewal Law blight factors are documented in this report: (a) Slum, deteriorated, or deteriorating structures. (b) Predominance of defective or inadequate street layout. (d) Unsanitary or unsafe conditions. (e) Deterioration of site or other improvements. (f) Unusual topography or inadequate public improvements or utilities. (k.5) The existence of health, safety, or welfare factors requiring high levels of municipal services or substantial physical underutilization or vacancy of sites, buildings, or other improvements. Evidence of the following Urban Renewal Law blight factors were not visually observable, and based on the presence of other, more significant physical conditions, these factors of blight did not warrant further investigation. (c) Faulty lot layout in relation to size, adequacy, accessibility, or usefulness. (g) Defective or unusual conditions of title rendering the title nonmarketable. (h) The existence of conditions that endanger life or property by fire or other causes. (i) Buildings that are unsafe or unhealthy for persons to live or work in because of building code violations, dilapidation, deterioration, defective design, physical construction, or faulty or inadequate facilities. (j) Environmental contamination of buildings or property. As established by Urban Renewal case law in Colorado, this assessment is based on the condition of the Study Area as a whole, and recognizes that there are properties within the Study Area in standard condition. However, there is substantial evidence and documentation of 6 of the 11 blight factors in the Study Area as a whole, predominately in the vacant structures and underutilized parcels. Appendix A College and Drake URA Existing Conditions Survey July 20, 2018 Economic & Planning Systems, Inc. 18 Appendix A Figure 3 Image Location Reference Map College and Drake URA Existing Conditions Survey July 20, 2018 Economic & Planning Systems, Inc. 19 Appendix A 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 College and Drake URA Existing Conditions Survey July 20, 2018 Economic & Planning Systems, Inc. 20 Appendix A 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 College and Drake URA Existing Conditions Survey July 20, 2018 Economic & Planning Systems, Inc. 21 Appendix A 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 College and Drake URA Existing Conditions Survey July 20, 2018 Economic & Planning Systems, Inc. 22 Appendix A 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 49 College and Drake URA Existing Conditions Survey July 20, 2018 Economic & Planning Systems, Inc. 23 Appendix A 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 College and Drake URA Existing Conditions Survey July 20, 2018 Economic & Planning Systems, Inc. 24 Appendix A 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 College and Drake URA Existing Conditions Survey July 20, 2018 Economic & Planning Systems, Inc. 25 Appendix A 74 75 76 77 78 79 80 81 82 83 84 85 College and Drake URA Existing Conditions Survey July 20, 2018 Economic & Planning Systems, Inc. 26 Appendix A 86 87 88 89 90 91 92 93 94 95 96 97 College and Drake URA Existing Conditions Survey July 20, 2018 Economic & Planning Systems, Inc. 27 Appendix A 98 99 100 101 102 103 104 105 106 107 108 109 College and Drake URA Existing Conditions Survey July 20, 2018 Economic & Planning Systems, Inc. 28 Appendix A 110 111 112 113 College and Drake URA Existing Conditions Survey July 20, 2018 Economic & Planning Systems, Inc. 29 Appendix A Image Number 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 1.01 Deteriorated External Walls / Visible Foundation X X 1.02 Deteriorated Roof X X 1.03 Deteriorated Fascia/Soffits 1.04 Deteriorated Gutters/Downspouts X 1.05 Deteriorated Exterior Finishes X X X 1.06 Deteriorated Windows and Doors X X X X X 1.07 Deteriorated Stairways/Fire Escapes/Loading Docks 1.08 Deteriorated Ancillary Structures 2.01 Inadequate Street or Alley Width / Cross-section / Geometry 2.02 Poor Provision of Streets or Unsafe Conditions for Vehicular Traffic X X X 2.03 Poor Provision of Sidewalks/Walkways or Unsafe Conditions for Pedestrians X 2.04 Insufficient Roadway Capacity Leading to Unusual Congestion 2.05 Inadequate Emergency Vehicle Access 2.06 Poor Vehicular or Pedestrian Access to Buildings or Sites X 2.07 Excessive Curb Cuts / Driveways along Commercial Blocks 2.08 Poor Internal Vehicular or Pedestrian Circulation X X 4.01 Floodplains or Flood Prone Areas 4.02 Inadequate Storm Drainage Systems/Ev idence of Standing Water 4.03 Poor Fire Protection Facilities 4.04 Above Average Incidences of Public Safety Responses 4.05 Inadequate Sanitation or Water Systems 4.06 Ex istence of Contaminants or Hazardous Conditions or Materials 4.07 High or Unusual Crime Statistics 4.08 Open / Unenclosed Trash Dumpsters X 4.09 Cracked or Uneven Surfaces for Pedestrians X X X 4.10 Illegal Dumping / Excessive Litter 4.11 Vagrants/Vandalism/Graffiti/Gang Activity X 4.12 Open Ditches, Holes, or Trenches in Pedestrian Areas 4.13 Poorly lit or unlit areas 4.14 Insufficient grading/steep slopes 4.15 Unsafe or exposed electrical wire X X X X 5.01 Neglected Properties or Evidence of Maintenance Deficiencies X 5.02 Deteriorated Signage or Lighting X X X X 5.03 Deteriorated Fences, Walls, or Gates 5.04 Deteriorated On-Site Parking Surfaces, Curb & Gutter, or Sidewalks X X X 5.05 Unpaved Parking Lot (Commercial Properties) 5.06 Poor Parking Lot / Driveway Layout X X ? 5.07 Poorly Maintained Landscaping / Overgrown Vegetation X X 6.01 Deteriorated pavement, curb, sidewalks, lighting, or drainage X X X X X X 6.02 Lack of pavement, curb, sidewalks, lighting, or drainage 6.03 Presence of Overhead Utilities or Billboards 6.04 Inadequate Fire Protection Facilities / Hydrants 6.05 Inadequate Sanitation or Water Systems 6.06 Unusual Topography 11.04 An Undeveloped Parcel in a Generally Urbanized Area 11.05 Disproportionately Underdeveloped Parcel 11.06 Vacant Structures X 11.07 Vacant Units in Multi-Unit Structures X X X Vacancy InfrastructureImprovements SiteLayout Unsafe / Unsanitary Street Buildings Table 5 Blight Conditions Image Reference, 1-30 College and Drake URA Existing Conditions Survey July 20, 2018 Economic & Planning Systems, Inc. 30 Appendix A Image Number 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 1.01 Deteriorated External Walls / Visible Foundation X X X 1.02 Deteriorated Roof 1.03 Deteriorated Fascia/Soffits 1.04 Deteriorated Gutters/Downspouts 1.05 Deteriorated Exterior Finishes X X X X X 1.06 Deteriorated Windows and Doors 1.07 Deteriorated Stairways/Fire Escapes/Loading Docks X 1.08 Deteriorated Ancillary Structures X 2.01 Inadequate Street or Alley Width / Cross-section / Geometry 2.02 Poor Provision of Streets or Unsafe Conditions for Vehicular Traffic X 2.03 Poor Provision of Sidewalks/Walkways or Unsafe Conditions for Pedestrians X 2.04 Insufficient Roadway Capacity Leading to Unusual Congestion 2.05 Inadequate Emergency Vehicle Access 2.06 Poor Vehicular or Pedestrian Access to Buildings or Sites 2.07 Excessive Curb Cuts / Driveways along Commercial Blocks 2.08 Poor Internal Vehicular or Pedestrian Circulation X X 4.01 Floodplains or Flood Prone Areas 4.02 Inadequate Storm Drainage Systems/Ev idence of Standing Water 4.03 Poor Fire Protection Facilities 4.04 Above Average Incidences of Public Safety Responses 4.05 Inadequate Sanitation or Water Systems 4.06 Ex istence of Contaminants or Hazardous Conditions or Materials 4.07 High or Unusual Crime Statistics 4.08 Open / Unenclosed Trash Dumpsters X X 4.09 Cracked or Uneven Surfaces for Pedestrians X X X 4.10 Illegal Dumping / Excessive Litter X X X X X 4.11 Vagrants/Vandalism/Graffiti/Gang Activity 4.12 Open Ditches, Holes, or Trenches in Pedestrian Areas 4.13 Poorly lit or unlit areas 4.14 Insufficient grading/steep slopes 4.15 Unsafe or exposed electrical wire X 5.01 Neglected Properties or Evidence of Maintenance Deficiencies X X 5.02 Deteriorated Signage or Lighting X 5.03 Deteriorated Fences, Walls, or Gates 5.04 Deteriorated On-Site Parking Surfaces, Curb & Gutter, or Sidewalks X X 5.05 Unpaved Parking Lot (Commercial Properties) 5.06 Poor Parking Lot / Driveway Layout X 5.07 Poorly Maintained Landscaping / Overgrown Vegetation X X X X X X X X X 6.01 Deteriorated pavement, curb, sidewalks, lighting, or drainage X X X X X X X 6.02 Lack of pavement, curb, sidewalks, lighting, or drainage X 6.03 Presence of Overhead Utilities or Billboards 6.04 Inadequate Fire Protection Facilities / Hydrants 6.05 Inadequate Sanitation or Water Systems 6.06 Unusual Topography 11.04 An Undeveloped Parcel in a Generally Urbanized Area 11.05 Disproportionately Underdeveloped Parcel 11.06 Vacant Structures 11.07 Vacant Units in Multi-Unit Structures Vacancy InfrastructureImprovements SiteUnsanitary UnsafeLayout / Street Buildings Table 6 Blight Conditions Image Reference, 31-60 College and Drake URA Existing Conditions Survey July 20, 2018 Economic & Planning Systems, Inc. 31 Appendix A Image Number 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 79 80 81 82 83 84 85 86 87 88 89 90 1.01 Deteriorated External Walls / Visible Foundation X 1.02 Deteriorated Roof X 1.03 Deteriorated Fascia/Soffits X 1.04 Deteriorated Gutters/Downspouts X 1.05 Deteriorated Exterior Finishes X X X X X X X X X 1.06 Deteriorated Windows and Doors X X 1.07 Deteriorated Stairways/Fire Escapes/Loading Docks 1.08 Deteriorated Ancillary Structures X 2.01 Inadequate Street or Alley Width / Cross-section / Geometry 2.02 Poor Provision of Streets or Unsafe Conditions for Vehicular Traffic X 2.03 Poor Provision of Sidewalks/Walkways or Unsafe Conditions for Pedestrians X X X 2.04 Insufficient Roadway Capacity Leading to Unusual Congestion 2.05 Inadequate Emergency Vehicle Access 2.06 Poor Vehicular or Pedestrian Access to Buildings or Sites X X X 2.07 Excessive Curb Cuts / Driveways along Commercial Blocks 2.08 Poor Internal Vehicular or Pedestrian Circulation X 4.01 Floodplains or Flood Prone Areas 4.02 Inadequate Storm Drainage Systems/Ev idence of Standing Water X 4.03 Poor Fire Protection Facilities 4.04 Above Average Incidences of Public Safety Responses 4.05 Inadequate Sanitation or Water Systems 4.06 Ex istence of Contaminants or Hazardous Conditions or Materials 4.07 High or Unusual Crime Statistics 4.08 Open / Unenclosed Trash Dumpsters X 4.09 Cracked or Uneven Surfaces for Pedestrians X X 4.10 Illegal Dumping / Excessive Litter X 4.11 Vagrants/Vandalism/Graffiti/Gang Activity X X X 4.12 Open Ditches, Holes, or Trenches in Pedestrian Areas 4.13 Poorly lit or unlit areas 4.14 Insufficient grading/steep slopes 4.15 Unsafe or exposed electrical wire X X 5.01 Neglected Properties or Evidence of Maintenance Deficiencies X 5.02 Deteriorated Signage or Lighting X X X 5.03 Deteriorated Fences, Walls, or Gates 5.04 Deteriorated On-Site Parking Surfaces, Curb & Gutter, or Sidewalks X 5.05 Unpaved Parking Lot (Commercial Properties) X X 5.06 Poor Parking Lot / Driveway Layout X 5.07 Poorly Maintained Landscaping / Overgrown Vegetation X X X 6.01 Deteriorated pavement, curb, sidewalks, lighting, or drainage X X X X X 6.02 Lack of pavement, curb, sidewalks, lighting, or drainage X X X 6.03 Presence of Overhead Utilities or Billboards 6.04 Inadequate Fire Protection Facilities / Hydrants 6.05 Inadequate Sanitation or Water Systems 6.06 Unusual Topography 11.04 An Undeveloped Parcel in a Generally Urbanized Area 11.05 Disproportionately Underdeveloped Parcel 11.06 Vacant Structures X X 11.07 Vacant Units in Multi-Unit Structures Vacancy InfrastructureImprovements SiteUnsanitary UnsafeLayout / Street Buildings Table 7 Blight Conditions Image Reference, 61-90 College and Drake URA Existing Conditions Survey July 20, 2018 Economic & Planning Systems, Inc. 32 Appendix A Image Number 91 92 93 94 95 96 97 98 99 100 101 102 103 104 105 106 107 108 109 110 111 112 113 1.01 Deteriorated External Walls / Visible Foundation 1.02 Deteriorated Roof 1.03 Deteriorated Fascia/Soffits 1.04 Deteriorated Gutters/Downspouts 1.05 Deteriorated Exterior Finishes 1.06 Deteriorated Windows and Doors 1.07 Deteriorated Stairways/Fire Escapes/Loading Docks 1.08 Deteriorated Ancillary Structures 2.01 Inadequate Street or Alley Width / Cross-section / Geometry 2.02 Poor Provision of Streets or Unsafe Conditions for Vehicular Traffic X X X X 2.03 Poor Provision of Sidewalks/Walkways or Unsafe Conditions for Pedestrians X X X X 2.04 Insufficient Roadway Capacity Leading to Unusual Congestion 2.05 Inadequate Emergency Vehicle Access 2.06 Poor Vehicular or Pedestrian Access to Buildings or Sites X 2.07 Excessive Curb Cuts / Driveways along Commercial Blocks 2.08 Poor Internal Vehicular or Pedestrian Circulation X 4.01 Floodplains or Flood Prone Areas 4.02 Inadequate Storm Drainage Systems/Ev idence of Standing Water 4.03 Poor Fire Protection Facilities 4.04 Above Average Incidences of Public Safety Responses 4.05 Inadequate Sanitation or Water Systems 4.06 Ex istence of Contaminants or Hazardous Conditions or Materials 4.07 High or Unusual Crime Statistics 4.08 Open / Unenclosed Trash Dumpsters X 4.09 Cracked or Uneven Surfaces for Pedestrians 4.10 Illegal Dumping / Excessive Litter X 4.11 Vagrants/Vandalism/Graffiti/Gang Activity 4.12 Open Ditches, Holes, or Trenches in Pedestrian Areas X 4.13 Poorly lit or unlit areas 4.14 Insufficient grading/steep slopes X X 4.15 Unsafe or exposed electrical wire X 5.01 Neglected Properties or Evidence of Maintenance Deficiencies X 5.02 Deteriorated Signage or Lighting 5.03 Deteriorated Fences, Walls, or Gates 5.04 Deteriorated On-Site Parking Surfaces, Curb & Gutter, or Sidewalks 5.05 Unpaved Parking Lot (Commercial Properties) X 5.06 Poor Parking Lot / Driveway Layout X X 5.07 Poorly Maintained Landscaping / Overgrown Vegetation X X X 6.01 Deteriorated pavement, curb, sidewalks, lighting, or drainage X X X X X X 6.02 Lack of pavement, curb, sidewalks, lighting, or drainage X X X X X 6.03 Presence of Overhead Utilities or Billboards 6.04 Inadequate Fire Protection Facilities / Hydrants 6.05 Inadequate Sanitation or Water Systems 6.06 Unusual Topography 11.04 An Undeveloped Parcel in a Generally Urbanized Area X X X 11.05 Disproportionately Underdeveloped Parcel X 11.06 Vacant Structures 11.07 Vacant Units in Multi-Unit Structures Vacancy InfrastructureImprovements SiteUnsanitary UnsafeLayout / Street Buildings Table 8 Blight Conditions Image Reference, 91-113 EXHIBIT B EXHIBIT C Urban Renewal Authority 222 Laporte Avenue PO Box 580 Fort Collins, CO 80522 970.416.2231 970.224.6107 - fax fcgov.com December 20, 2019 Dear Property Owner: The primary purpose of this letter is to inform you that the Fort Collins City Council will conduct a public hearing Tuesday, January 21, 2020, at 6:00 p.m. in the Council Chambers, City Hall West, 300 LaPorte Avenue to consider the following around the intersection of College Avenue and Drake Road: 1. Adoption of an Urban Renewal Plan 2. Adoption of an existing conditions survey finding conditions of blight 3. Determine whether to authorize the use of eminent domain for the acquisition of private property interests within the Urban Renewal Plan area for the purpose of undertaking an urban renewal project A map showing the area included in the proposed Urban Renewal Plan is on the back of this letter. An Urban Renewal Plan is intended to stimulate private sector development in and around a designated area. A combination of private investment, URA financing, and public investment will assist progress toward the following objectives: ▪ To facilitate redevelopment and new development by private enterprise through cooperation among developers and public agencies to plan, design, and build needed improvements. ▪ To address conditions in the area that may hinder sound growth of the city. ▪ To implement the Comprehensive Plan and its related elements. ▪ To redevelop and rehabilitate the area in a manner which is compatible with and complementary to unique circumstances in the area. ▪ To improve pedestrian, bicycle, and vehicular circulation and safety. ▪ To ultimately contribute to increased revenues for all taxing entities. ▪ To encourage the voluntary rehabilitation of buildings, improvements and conditions. The City of Fort Collins considers your interest and input in this matter an extremely important part of this process. If you are unable to attend the Council’s public hearing, but would like to provide input, written comments are welcome. Please email comments or questions to cfrickey@fcgov.com. The mailing list for this public meeting was derived from official records of the Larimer County Assessor and City records. You may access a draft of the proposed plan at https://www.renewfortcollins.com/img/site_specific/uploads/Draft_College_and_Drake_Urban_R enewal_Plan.pdf. Sincerely, Clay Frickey, AICP Redevelopment Program Manager | Fort Collins Urban Renewal Authority 970.416.2517 | cfrickey@fcgov.com EXHIBIT D Urban Renewal Authority 222 Laporte Avenue PO Box 580 Fort Collins, CO 80522 970.416.2231 970.224.6107 - fax fcgov.com EXHIBIT D