HomeMy WebLinkAboutCOUNCIL - COMPLETE AGENDA - 01/14/2025City of Fort Collins Page 1 of 2
City Council
Work Session Agenda
January 14, 2025 at 6:00 PM
Jeni Arndt, Mayor
Emily Francis, District 6, Mayor Pro Tem
Susan Gutowsky, District 1
Julie Pignataro, District 2
Tricia Canonico, District 3
Melanie Potyondy, District 4
Kelly Ohlson, District 5
Council Information Center (CIC)
300 Laporte Avenue, Fort Collins
Cablecast on FCTV
Channel 14 on Connexion
Channel 14 and 881 on Comcast
Carrie Daggett Kelly DiMartino Delynn Coldiron
City Attorney City Manager City Clerk
CITY COUNCIL WORK SESSION
6:00 PM
A) CALL MEETING TO ORDER
B) ITEMS FOR DISCUSSION
1. Community Report: I-25 and Mulberry Interchange Design.
The purpose of this item is for the Colorado Department of Transportation (CDOT) to engage with
City Council regarding the upcoming project at I-25/Mulberry and hear their
concerns/comments/ideas for the outcomes of the project.
2. Proposed Building Performance Standards Policy.
The purpose of this item is to discuss considerations related to a proposed Building Performance
Standards (BPS) policy, with consideration of economic and environmental health, feasibility, and
timeline. Staff seek Council member feedback related to the policy framework before a first
reading.
3. Transportation Capital Improvement.
The purpose of this item is to discuss methodology, criteria, and prioritization of the Transportation
Capital Improvement (TCI) dashboard effort and determine if Councilmembers support the draft
findings.
4. Strategic Trails Plan Update.
The project team has made considerable progress over the last eight months and the (STP) is
nearing completion. The plan enters its third and final phase and it’s an opportune moment to
pause and garner feedback from Council.
Following Council feedback, staff will focus on finalizing the tasks and will develop the draft plan
which will be available for public review in late February. After incorporating final comments, the
plan will be finalized and shared with Council for consideration in May 2025.
Page 1
City of Fort Collins Page 2 of 2
C) ANNOUNCEMENTS
D) ADJOURNMENT
Upon request, the City of Fort Collins will provide language access services for individuals who have
limited English proficiency, or auxiliary aids and services for individuals with disabilities, to access City
services, programs and activities. Contact 970.221.6515 (V/TDD: Dial 711 for Relay Colorado) for
assistance. Please provide advance notice. Requests for interpretation at a meeting should be made by
noon the day before.
A solicitud, la Ciudad de Fort Collins proporcionará servicios de acceso a idiomas para personas que no
dominan el idioma inglés, o ayudas y servicios auxiliares para personas con discapacidad, para que
puedan acceder a los servicios, programas y actividades de la Ciudad. Para asistencia, llame al
970.221.6515 (V/TDD: Marque 711 para Relay Colorado). Por favor proporcione aviso previo. Las
solicitudes de interpretación en una reunión deben realizarse antes del mediodía del día anterior.
Page 2
File Attachments for Item:
1. Community Report: I-25 and Mulberry Interchange Design.
The purpose of this item is for the Colorado Department of Transportation (CDOT) to engage
with City Council regarding the upcoming project at I-25/Mulberry and hear their
concerns/comments/ideas for the outcomes of the project.
Page 3
City Council Work Session Agenda Item Summary – City of Fort Collins Page 1 of 2
January 14, 2025
WORK SESSION AGENDA
ITEM SUMMARY
City Council
STAFF
Brad Buckman, City Engineer
Spencer Smith, Special Projects Engineer
SUBJECT FOR DISCUSSION
Community Report: I-25 and Mulberry Interchange Design
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
The purpose of this item is for the Colorado Department of Transportation (CDOT) to engage with City
Council regarding the upcoming project at I-25/Mulberry and hear their concerns/comments/ideas for the
outcomes of the project.
GENERAL DIRECTION SOUGHT AND SPECIFIC QUESTIONS TO BE ANSWERED
1. Is the I-25/Mulberry interchange a priority for the City of Fort Collins?
a. If yes, CDOT requests the City of Fort Collins to maintain the I-25/Mulberry interchange as
a priority project for the North Front Range Metropolitan Planning Organization (NFRMPO)
b. If no, please explain why.
2. After hearing the historical background and the proposed goals of the project, what else would the City
of Fort Collins like to see addressed or evaluated as part of this project?
3. The Cooper Slough Floodplain is a large technical challenge and partial piece of this project. That
said, the floodplain extends way beyond the interchange project limits and should be a project of its
own. Is addressing the floodplain and flooding issue a stormwater priority for the City of Fort Collins?
BACKGROUND / DISCUSSION
CDOT Project Schedule:
2000-2011: SH14/I-25 redesigned as part of the I-25 Environmental Impact Study (EIS) to
accommodate the express lane and to address safety and aging infrastructure.
2019: SH14/I-25 interchange prioritized by NFRMPO and CDOT, identified on CDOT’s 10-yr Plan
of Projects
2023: Preliminary design funds allocated to advance/refine interchange concept and to seek grant
funding (No construction funding)
Page 4
Item 1.
City Council Work Session Agenda Item Summary – City of Fort Collins Page 2 of 2
2024: CDOT hired Benesch Consulting to support design effort
2024-2025: Design optimizations within existing EIS footprint, ongoing outreach to stakeholders,
Fort Collins 1041 initiation
May 2025: Identify preferred optimization/layout of proposed
2025-2026: CDOT to begin pursuing grants for additional design funds and construction funding
When construction funds are secured: Begin construction, earliest design completion, right-of-way
acquisition and NEPA would be Fall 2026
CDOT has begun to partner with the City of Fort Collins and Larimer County to enhance safety (i.e.,
vehicular, bicycle, and pedestrian) at and near the interchange of I-25/Mulberry. CDOT is also looking to
correct aging infrastructure and provide multimodal opportunities.
This project has preliminary design funds budgeted but will be pursuing grants and other funding
opportunities to secure funding for final design and construction.
CDOT recognizes the scope of this project extends far beyond the limits of the interchange and sees this
work as a catalyst for looking beyond the I-25/Mulberry node and an opportunity to solve long standing
issues regarding flooding, access and multimodal connectivity. CDOT is seeking and requesting strong
partnerships with the City of Fort Collins and Larimer County to improve and address these long-standing
areas of concern. Specifically, if the two agencies wished to improve the Cooper Sough Floodplain by
removing insurable structures from the Floodplain, while also creating a bike/ped Box Elder crossing at I-
25, now is the time to bring this to CDOT’s attention and incorporate certain aspects into design.
It is important to note, CDOT is focusing on the scope along Mulberry and at I-25, which does not include
Floodplain work. We recognize the larger issues in the area outside of the CDOT right-of-way (i.e., Cooper
Slough Floodplain) and wish to be a partner, so projects can be combined and overall tax dollars expended
in the area reduced via mobilization and design costs. Additionally, constructing the area in a single project
will reduce the fatigue of construction to the residents and roadway users.
NEXT STEPS
CDOT will continue to move forward with the project design and coordinate with the City and other local
agencies and stakeholders (i.e., NFRMPO, City of Fort Collins Chamber of Commerce, Larimer County,
etc. as necessary. Feedback from Council will be considered in the scope of this design.
ATTACHMENTS
1. presentation
Page 5
Item 1.
I-25 & Mulberry Interchange
Improvements
Page 6
Item 1.
Project Location
I-25 and Colorado Highway 14
(Mulberry Street) interchange in Fort
Collins
•I-25 North, between Mile Point 269
and MP 271.
•Includes the Mulberry Street
interchange and the frontage road
connections in Larimer County and
the City of Fort Collins (for
approximately one mile along CO
14, from MP 138.7 to 139.25).
January 7, 2025 I-25 & Mulberry Interchange Improvements 2
Page 7
Item 1.
Project Goals
•Enhance safety
•Support an equitable transportation connection of neighboring communities
for good paying jobs
•Improve projected levels of service for traffic growth, high turn volumes,
future transit, and increased bicycle/pedestrian traffic
•Bridge replacement and improve riding surface
•Address floodplain issues
•Modernize the site for increased use of electric vehicles
•Coordinate with stakeholders and the public to reach an economically
feasible design alternative
•Secure construction funds
January 7, 2025 I-25 & Mulberry Interchange Improvements 3
Page 8
Item 1.
Project Overview
Proposed improvements will address:
•Unconventional traffic operations
•Aging infrastructure
•Traffic growth and regional
population growth
•Safe and multi-modal-friendly
connection point for pedestrians
and cyclists
•Flooding concerns (Pending Local
Partnerships with City and County)
January 7, 2025 I-25 & Mulberry Interchange Improvements 4
Page 9
Item 1.
NORTHERN COLORADO
Page 10
Item 1.
Background information
North I-25 EIS Report
•Recommended 3 general purpose
and 1 Express Toll Lane in each
direction from Denver to CO
14/Mulberry Street
•Rebuild CO 14 interchange as a
diamond
•Carpool lot at CO 14 interchange
•West frontage road undercrossing
•Realign northeast frontage road
•Record of Decision 2011
January 7, 2025 I-25 & Mulberry Interchange Improvements 6
Page 11
Item 1.
Background information
Interchange Type Selection Report
Projected traffic to 2050 and will evaluate interchange types:
•Standard Diamond with Signals
•Tight Diamond with Signals
•Partial Cloverleaf
•Single Point Urban (SPUI)
•Diverging Diamond (DDI)
•NB to WB Flyover Ramp
Will evaluate west frontage road alternatives:
•Stop-controlled (diamond alternative)
•Roundabouts
•Greenfields as frontage road
•One-way frontage roads
•Full intersection
•Connecting John Deer Dr and Stockton Ave
January 7, 2025 I-25 & Mulberry Interchange Improvements 7
I-25 & Mulberry St (CO 14)
2050 Projected Traffic Volumes
Page 12
Item 1.
Local Drainage
January 7, 2025 I-25 & Mulberry Interchange Improvements 8
July 2022 August 2024
Page 13
Item 1.
Project Schedule
To Date
•Selected consultant firm to progress design and support with grants
•Completed a Value Engineering process in Fall 2024
•Kicked off design in Winter 2024
•Ongoing outreach with neighboring stakeholders
Up Ahead
•Optimizations in the EIS Footprint will be analyzed and quantified through
early summer 2025
•Construction dependent on securing funding
January 7, 2025 I-25 & Mulberry Interchange Improvements 9
Page 14
Item 1.
We want to hear from you!
It’s time for a little Q&A round table discussion.
January 7, 2025 I-25 & Mulberry Interchange Improvements 10
Page 15
Item 1.
January 7, 2025 I-25 & Mulberry Interchange Improvements 11
Thank you!
Connect with us
•Visit the project website
•www.codot.gov/projects/i25mulberryinterchange
•Email the project team
•i25mulberry@gmail.com
•Call the project hotline
•970-430-6651
Page 16
Item 1.
File Attachments for Item:
2. Proposed Building Performance Standards Policy.
The purpose of this item is to discuss considerations related to a proposed Building
Performance Standards (BPS) policy, with consideration of economic and environmental health,
feasibility, and timeline. Staff seek Council member feedback related to the policy framework
before a first reading.
Page 17
City Council Work Session Agenda Item Summary – City of Fort Collins Page 1 of 8
January 14, 2025
WORK SESSION AGENDA
ITEM SUMMARY
City Council
STAFF
Brian Tholl, Energy Services Manager
Katherine Bailey, Energy Services Program Manager
SUBJECT FOR DISCUSSION
Proposed Building Performance Standards Policy.
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
The purpose of this item is to discuss considerations related to a proposed Building Performance
Standards (BPS) policy, with consideration of economic and environmental health, feasibility, and
timeline. Staff seek Council member feedback related to the policy framework before a first reading.
GENERAL DIRECTION SOUGHT AND SPECIFIC QUESTIONS TO BE ANSWERED
1. Does Council have feedback on a local BPS framework as a regulatory method of advancing the
community to 2030 and 2050 goals?
2. Does Council have feedback on adjusting proposed timelines, maximum reduction caps, or covered
buildings?
3. What other considerations should staff incorporate into the proposed BPS framework?
BACKGROUND / DISCUSSION
Overview
On April 23, 2024, staff presented proposed BPS policy details in a work session, including a policy
overview, requirements, alternate compliance options, and supporting research. The presented BPS policy
recommendations were designed to support the community-driven goal of an 80% greenhouse gas (GHG)
emission reduction by 2030, as defined in the adopted Our Climate Future (OCF) plan. This work session
outlined how regulatory strategies like BPS, in addition to economic, behavioral and infrastructure
strategies, will be required mechanisms to achieve OCF goals. Per the Sept. 10, 2024 City Manager’s
Recommended Budget – Our Climate Future memo, the City is currently forecasting a path to achieve
70% GHG reduction by 2030, which includes 3% savings from the proposed BPS. BPS is the single most
impactful, direct policy action the City can take to reduce GHG emissions.
BPS recommendations were informed by two years of collaboration with local industry representatives,
building science experts, jurisdictional partners, and many others, and are further supported by thorough
analysis of local data. Recommendations are designed around feasibility, crafting achievable efficiency
Page 18
Item 2.
City Council Work Session Agenda Item Summary – City of Fort Collins Page 2 of 8
targets specific to buildings’ unique use types, along with a selection of alternate pathways, or ‘safety nets,’
provided for buildings with unique circumstances.
A second work session on June 11, 2024, provided details on policy implementation including proposed
supporting resources. During this work session, staff spoke to the robust resources that will be critical to
support building owners through implementation. Both our local community and other jurisdictions with
existing policies have stressed the need for extensive education, citing this as the most important support
for building owners. In addition to exploring additional financial incentives and a financial navigator, staff
have begun developing the building owner hub and portal outlined in the Implementation Guide submitted
with the June 11 work session materials. Additionally, staff have begun partnering with a vendor to develop
advanced technical support to provide technical education and assistance managing upgrades. This
process will engage building owners in the community, working initially with a small number of buildings to
develop technical support that ensures owners understand the best options to come into compliance. This
is designed to help shape the robust body of technical support that will be offered to the wider body of
covered buildings in the event of policy adoption. Costs to support the larger body of buildings will be offset
by a $4.5 million U.S. Department of Energy grant, anticipated to be distributed beginning in July of 2025.
Economic and Environmental Considerations
Since the June 11, 2024 Council work session, staff have continued to hear feedback about how BPS may
impact the community, including high-level concerns that environmental and economic goals may be in
conflict. Community feedback included the following themes:
The proposed BPS has the potential to cause inequitable impacts across building types
Questions about accuracy of projected policy impacts on all properties
Building owners do not have sufficient resources to comply
The proposed BPS framework would require about two-thirds of covered building owners to make energy
improvements like equipment upgrades or behavioral changes. While all buildings are unique, staff
developed the following data points for informed decision making in the development of this policy. Find
more information in Attachment 2: BPS supporting data.
Economic:
Economic impacts associated with improved building efficiency were discussed during the April 23, 2024
work session and include building specific factors (such as reduced energy burden, increased occupancy,
tenant retention, occupant productivity, and resale value) along with broader societal economic impacts of
climate change and climate change mitigation efforts. Economic impacts affect owners of covered buildings
who are not currently meeting targets. Out of about 1,400 covered buildings, there are less than 800 local
building owners, approximately 550 of which are not already meeting proposed targets.
Estimated collective building owner costs:
$226 million before rebates, tax deductions, and without business-as-usual assumptions.
o On average 1% purchase price
o On average $4-5 per square foot
o On average $200,000 per building
Same cost as average tenant finish over the last 10 years
By 2050, covered buildings would avoid $630 million in energy costs
By 2050, the benefit is $2.80 for every $1 spent
Page 19
Item 2.
City Council Work Session Agenda Item Summary – City of Fort Collins Page 3 of 8
Building upgrades have an average simple payback of approximately eight years
BPS upfront costs directly benefit rate payers in avoided energy costs
Additional costs not considered herein include broader infrastructure and rate impacts, which affect Utility
rate payers across the community. The estimated administrative cost of conserved energy for efficiency is
significantly less than the 2024 wholesale cost of electricity, and likewise community BPS costs are lower
than rates per unit of electricity. Reducing energy use through efficiency is a critical balance for future
electrification; electrifying all buildings and transportation today would triple our current electric load, far
surpassing PRPA forecasts of load increase and necessitating increased infrastructure investments.
Electrifying inefficient buildings would also be very costly to rate payers.
Environmental:
BPS are associated with significant non-energy benefits, as discussed in the April 23, 2024 work session.
Health, safety, comfort, and resilience are tied to improved building efficiency and would directly impact
tens of thousands of occupants who live and work in covered buildings, while reductions in natural gas use
and GHG emissions benefits the community as a whole. Environmental impacts specifically associated
with the proposed policy include:
About 65,000 fewer metric tons of carbon dioxide equivalent (MTCO2e) emitted every year once
targets have been met
About 1.5 million MTCO2e cumulatively avoided by 2050
Natural gas reduction by 2030:
o 3 million therms avoided through BPS (compared to 2.5 million therms avoided through
electrification efforts)
BPS supports Council-adopted electrification goals through efficiency, which is a crucial first step for
strategic electrification
Table 1: Community BPS Emissions Impact
BPS come with significant upfront costs to building owners, and savings accrue more slowly thereafter
than may be considered ideal for building owners. Some building owners may only plan to own their
buildings for five or 10 years and have shared a general preference for less than three years return on
investment. Below are potential levers which could alter associated costs as well as GHG savings. In
addition to levers built into the proposed policy framework, the framework itself can be changed by altering
the timeline, the maximum reductions required, or the covered buildings.
0
10,000
20,000
30,000
40,000
50,000
60,000
70,000
2025 2030 2035 2040 2045 2050
Community BPS Emissions Reduction
(MTCO₂e)
Page 20
Item 2.
City Council Work Session Agenda Item Summary – City of Fort Collins Page 4 of 8
Policy Levers: Trade-Offs
The recommended policy framework discussed in the April 23, 2024 work session includes levers that can
be adjusted throughout implementation, such as increased support (technical, educational, or financial),
and altering proposed safety nets. The latter may include changing eligibility criteria for waivers or timeline
or target adjustments (alterations which would not impact buildings’ progress toward compliance, but rather
provide relief for those with non-compliance status upon reaching the target deadline).
Staff stress that a BPS policy framework should allow sufficient flexibility to make any alterations necessary
throughout implementation to ensure achievability without significant negative economic repercussions in
the short-term. While Fort Collins has access to more local data informing costs and savings than many
other jurisdictions creating BPS policies, staff acknowledge there is always the possibility that
circumstances change and costs increase, and therefore incorporated safety nets and options for
additional support to address those issues. However, changes can be made to the proposed framework
itself to further reduce economic impact on building owners. These alterations can be viewed as trade-offs,
in that they may reduce costs for all or some building owners, but also may reduce the emission reduction
impact of the policy. Three potential alterations, or levers, and the associated tradeoffs are summarized,
with more detail below.
Timeline extension
o Minimal economic impact
o Delays environmental impact
o Moderate administrative impact
Target (reduce maximum reduction cap)
o High economic impact
o High environmental impact
o Minimal administrative impact
Covered buildings (excluding small or multi-family buildings)
o High economic impact
o High environmental impact
o Moderate administrative impact
Lever 1: Timeline extension
The recommended BPS framework proposes that commercial and multi-family buildings over 10,000
square feet meet final targets by 2030, while buildings between 5,000-10,000 square feet meet final targets
by 2035. These timelines were developed by the BPS Task Force during 2023 as policy recommendations
supporting adopted OCF goals. To respect the work done by our community and acknowledge the
assumptions they worked within, staff recommend that a 2030 deadline no longer be considered for
community buildings if policy adoption is not feasible within 2025. This ensures building owners have an
appropriate runway to learn about the policy and take any necessary steps to comply. It is the
recommendation of staff, supported by technical experts and experience shared from other jurisdictions
with similar policies, that four years is insufficient for this work. However, a staggered implementation could
continue to enforce a 2030 deadline for municipal buildings and a later deadline for community owned
buildings.
Staff request feedback on the 2030 and 2035 timelines. If policy adoption is delayed, each delayed year
the community would emit an estimated 10,000 additional MTCO2e. That equates to a half-percent
Page 21
Item 2.
City Council Work Session Agenda Item Summary – City of Fort Collins Page 5 of 8
removed for every year of delay from the OCF goal of an 80% GHG emissions reduction by 2030. This
pathway doesn’t prevent savings indefinitely, but rather postpones them.
Lever 2: Reduce maximum reduction caps
The recommended BPS framework includes a maximum reduction cap of 25% for commercial and multi-
family buildings over 10,000 square feet, while buildings between 5,000-10,000 square feet are capped
at 15%. Factoring in proposed caps, the average reduction on a per building basis is approximately 12%.
Maximum reduction caps are one of the proposed safety nets designed to limit the financial and technical
investment needed to comply by the most inefficient buildings.
Proposed efficiency targets were determined through a robust technical analysis with near term feasibility
as a guiding principle, as were proposed maximum reduction caps. Targets were set based on an
analysis of savings that could be achieved within existing systems, rather than assuming systems will be
replaced (using what in other jurisdictions would be an interim target methodology).
Staff request feedback on the initially proposed maximum reduction cap. The policy itself can be adjusted
by lowering the caps by 5% (from 25% to 20% and 15% to 10%), which would reduce program GHG
savings and community costs by about 20%.
Lever 3: Covered Buildings
Accounting for the potential for inequitable impacts to specific buildings, staff continue to build out support
for under-resourced buildings (URBs). These buildings were identified through a scoped body of work in
2024, which engaged the community to isolate common barriers faced by URBs. Within the existing policy
framework, implementation solutions proposed to address inequitable impacts to URBs include variable
levels of support (e.g., higher rebates and more technical support), along with timeline and target
adjustments.
Small Buildings (5,000 to 10,000 square feet)
Community contributors participated in robust conversations discussing the appropriate size of buildings
to cover, based on potential savings, building specifics, and industry expertise. Through these
conversations, contributors landed on including buildings 5,000 square feet and larger but offering both an
extended timeline and more attainable targets (through the reduced maximum reduction cap) in buildings
between 5,000-10,000 square feet. There are 310 buildings within the small building cohort, that have an
average estimated compliance cost of $4.10-4.55 per square foot. Those buildings constitute about 6% of
the total covered square footage.
Staff seek feedback on excluding small businesses from the covered buildings. Not including small
buildings in the BPS policy would equate to about a 5% reduction in GHG policy impact, and a similar
reduction to covered building owner costs.
Multi-family and Affordable Housing
Housing affordability is a key priority and was discussed at length by community contributors. To exclude
the majority of naturally occurring affordable housing (unsubsidized affordable properties), community
contributors supported excluding multi-family buildings under three stories, along with those under 5,000
square feet (this removed 97% of local multi-family buildings from the proposed policy). The average size
of the remaining covered properties is 80,000 square feet.
Within covered properties, community-based organizations helped the City isolate about a dozen naturally
occurring affordable housing properties and requested that staff focus on those properties. If policy
implementation demonstrates that benefits outweigh costs in naturally occurring affordable housing,
community feedback supported considering future requirements that would include smaller multi-family
Page 22
Item 2.
City Council Work Session Agenda Item Summary – City of Fort Collins Page 6 of 8
properties, so policy benefits could be appreciated by more tenants. The community has shared with staff
that energy costs can be exorbitant for multi-family tenants in inefficient properties, some of whom struggle
maintaining adequate temperatures. Further feedback included concerns that tenants have minimal
agency to improve their living space and may fear retribution if they discuss energy efficiency with
landlords. As a regulatory pathway requiring upfront community investment, BPS is unique in that cost
savings (along with physical health benefits) impact tenants directly in most cases.
The community desire for safer, more comfortable and resilient housing must be carefully balanced with
the risk of increased costs in the near future. Community-based organizations noted that even if multi-
family owners or operators have upfront costs fully rebated, there is the risk that rents could rise because
improved properties have a higher market value. Community recommendations included increasing
support for these properties, even exploring options to provide additional rebates contingent upon
minimizing rent increases (potentially aligned with dynamic Colorado Housing and Finance Authority
limits).
Staff request feedback on how multi-family properties should be considered in a BPS framework. The
proposed policy can be altered by removing those buildings, which would reduce GHG policy impact and
costs by about 17%. Multi-family buildings comprise about 30% of total covered square footage. Just over
100 covered campuses are not currently meeting targets, and estimated costs average between $4-$5 per
square foot before rebates, incentives, and any business-as-usual assumptions.
BPS: A Truly Local Option
BPS policies vary widely across the country, reflecting significant variability in local buildings, community
priorities, and sustainability goals. In some existing policies, administrative rules outline specific pathways
designed to achieve pre-determined emissions reductions requirements. While our OCF plan sets a
community GHG emissions reduction target, there is no local law requiring a specific reduction attributed
to BPS. Therefore, proposed requirements were built from the ground up in partnership with informed local
contributors, and final recommendations were set with an understanding that achievability is more
important than regulating aggressive climate mitigation efforts; unachievable targets not only hurt our
community but have broader repercussions due to the potential for Fort Collins to serve as an example to
other jurisdictions considering similar policies.
Fort Collins’ policy development benefited further in the ability to source our technical assumptions in real,
local case studies (see Attachment 1: BPS Case studies). Incentive-based programs in Fort Collins provide
over 20 years of examples of how this work has been done locally, providing full costs, savings, and
avoided electric use.
Further community engagement in 2024 focused on barriers faced in commercial and multi-family
buildings. Community contributors acknowledge that buildings are community assets, and investing in their
efficiency benefits many people in Fort Collins. Engaged community members placed a high value on
efficiency and indoor air quality, and discussed barriers to improvements including staff capacity, lack of
education and awareness, and misalignment between who benefits from efficiency and the decision
makers. Economic barriers were discussed holistically, including increased insurance costs and utility bills
(both of which were noted as likely to continue to increase due to climate change). More than half of
surveyed multi-family tenants said they were interested in making energy efficiency improvements, and
another 19% said they were interested, but their owner/management was not.
Learning from Experience
In addition to learning from community examples, the City is leading by example and learning from our
own experience. As detailed in a Sept. 10 Council memo, 55% of City-owned buildings are already in
compliance with proposed targets (as compared to about 33% of externally-owned buildings). Costs for
City buildings to come into compliance are estimated at just over $5 million, including the full replacement
Page 23
Item 2.
City Council Work Session Agenda Item Summary – City of Fort Collins Page 7 of 8
cost of equipment that is reaching end of life as well as any unrelated updates necessary within those
buildings (as all needed updates would ideally be done at the same time). A third-party consultant is
providing support, reviewing upcoming projects and aligning them with local, state and federal funding
sources, including both tax credits and other upfront funding resources, to complement Budgeting for
Outcomes offers.
The local nature of this type of policy does not preclude our learning from other jurisdictions and federal
partners, and staff have gained much through collaborative sharing of challenges and successes with
partners across the country. Organized groups such as the nationwide BPS Technical Assistance Network
(coordinated through the U.S. Department of Energy, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Institute for
Market Transformation, and other trusted partners) provide regular opportunities for jurisdictions across
the country to meet and share knowledge.
In the State of Colorado, there are four adopted BPS policies, and Denver is the furthest along. The
Energize Denver platform recently engaged about 1,500 community members. Feedback from their
process supports the need for new policy ‘safety nets’ which are already included in Fort Collins’ proposed
policy, along with stressing the importance of sufficient support for buildings owners. Specifically, waivers
for vacancy and financial distress, maximum reduction caps (Denver now proposes a 42% maximum
reduction cap), and target adjustments surfaced as important administrative additions to their program.
Denver program staff note a key challenge is that this policy represents a true paradigm shift for many
building owners, who may have not previously considered managing energy use applicable to their bottom
line.
The Fort Collins BPS policy stands out in comparison to others nationwide as having a relatively short
timeline. Our community contributors considered the possibility that the proposed BPS requirements
represent an initial wave, which could be expanded upon in years to come to support 2050 goals. Our
building community was vocal about requesting we start earlier if we consider a more aggressive regulatory
pathway to 2050 that may require changing out building equipment to meet targets.
Legal Challenges
Current legal challenges faced by Denver, the state of Colorado, and other jurisdictions with BPS question
if BPS conflicts with the 1975 Energy Policy and Conservation Act (EPCA). EPCA prevents jurisdictions
from requiring appliances at a higher level of efficiency than the federal standard. Given these legal
challenges, Fort Collins recommendations were set based on efficiencies that could be obtained within
existing systems, bypassing any requirement for upgraded appliances. Based on the outcome of ongoing
litigation, Fort Collins policy could be further strengthened by administrative updates to target adjustments
prior to final citations in 2031.
Accounting for the legal landscape and the nature of BPS as a relatively new jurisdictional tool, BPS Code
should allow for (and encourage) administrative rules to be updated throughout implementation as and if
warranted, such as proposed updates to Denver’s administrative rules based on ongoing community
feedback described above. This can be explicit (e.g., “every five years there will be a review and change
as appropriate”) or implicit (through flexible code language).
NEXT STEPS
Staff seek feedback from Council on the current recommended policy framework which includes a suite of
resources to help offset upfront costs and reduce barriers. Alternatively, staff request feedback on the
potential to change the proposed policy framework, considering the three structural levers presented in
this document.
Page 24
Item 2.
City Council Work Session Agenda Item Summary – City of Fort Collins Page 8 of 8
ATTACHMENTS
1. BPS Case studies
2. BPS Supporting data
3. Presentation
Page 25
Item 2.
Fort Collins Building Performance Standards Case Studies
Contents
City Buildings .................................................................................................................. 2
Fossil Creek Park Shop, 5833 S. Lemay Ave. (FC2975) ............................................. 3
Traffic Operations, 626 Linden St. (FC1313) ............................................................... 5
Building Services, 281 N. College Ave. (FC2660) ........................................................ 7
Community Buildings: Efficiency Works Business Program Participants ........................ 8
Local House of Worship ............................................................................................... 9
Local Small Grocer .................................................................................................... 11
Local Retail ................................................................................................................ 12
Local Restaurant........................................................................................................ 13
Local Strip Mall .......................................................................................................... 14
Glossary of Terms ......................................................................................................... 15
Historic Examples.......................................................................................................... 17
Page 26
Item 2.
City Buildings
As established in 2022, buildings owned by the City of Fort Collins are required to comply with
performance standards (§ 12-203 (c) of the Municipal Code). The code states that by 2026,
City-owned buildings must define a standard percentage reduction to be meet by City-owned
buildings.
Building on the code’s impact, City staff collaborated with community experts to define
achievable recommendations for citywide Building Performance Standards (BPS) that can be
applied to commercial and multi-family buildings within Fort Collins.
The City strives to lead by example, and staff received strong support from City Council to alter
targets for City buildings to align with targets set for community buildings should City Council
adopt BPS requirements for privately-owned buildings.
A September 2024 memo submitted to City Council outlined specific requirements for City
buildings to come into compliance, including an analysis of overall costs for those buildings that
will need to take action to reach proposed BPS targets.
In addition to regular maintenance, efforts continue to improve City-owned buildings so they can
achieve proposed BPS targets and to advance Council’s electrification priority. The following
case studies demonstrate ongoing and recent efforts in three City buildings and the results of
those efforts, both expected1 and realized.
1 Program savings are based on the calculated difference in efficiency from existing to installed
equipment and are customized accounting for building use specifics (e.g., lighting savings factor
wattage differences between new and existing bulbs and actual hours of use). Calculated
savings may not align exactly with reductions in consumption due to the range of other variables
impacting electric use, however savings can accurately be viewed as usage that would exist
without upgrades.
Page 27
Item 2.
Fossil Creek Park Shop, 5833 S. Lemay Ave. (FC2975)
The Fossil Creek Park Shop is a 6,550 square foot shop built in 2000. The building’s 2024
reported Energy Use Intensity (EUI) was 118.4 kBtu / square foot, 34% over the proposed Fort
Collins BPS EUI target for the property use type (Other- Public Services) of 84 kBtu / square
foot. As part of the proposed BPS policy, staff recommend buildings of this size not be required
to exceed a 15% reduction from their reported energy use. This “maximum reduction cap”
means that this building will have a modified target by its 2035 timeline, and instead of the 84
kBtu / square foot, it will need to achieve an annual reported target of 100.6 kBtu / square foot.
The building’s total electric use in 2022 was 87,360 kilowatt-hours (kWh), and in 2023 was
77,840 kWh. A lighting retrofit in 2023 had some impact on 2023 annual energy use and will
have more in 2024. The building’s 2025 reported EUI will therefore reflect the reduction in EUI.
Similarly, a roof top unit (RTU) retrofit and the installation of a building automation system were
completed in fall of 2024. Those will impact 2025 usage and appear in the building’s 2026
reported EUI.
The sum of savings below is estimated to be 36,943 kWh, accounting for approximately 38%
electric use reduction. The City also expects to see major reductions in gas use associated with
a heating, ventilation and cooling conversion.
2023 interior lighting retrofit
Cost: $14,005
Utility rebate: $11,194
Total project cost after rebate: $2,811
Simple payback: 3.8 years
Annual estimated kWh savings: 9,403
2024 heat pump RTU retrofit
Cost: $42,835
No direct Utility rebates are available for HVAC rooftop units. HVAC rebates are provided
to distributors to provide access to high efficiency HVAC equipment
Simple payback: 10.0 years
Annual estimated kWh savings: 15,340
RTU conversion to dual fuel heat pump technology (electrification)
Page 28
Item 2.
2024 building automation system
Cost: $49,500
No direct Utility rebate available
Simple payback: 12.0 years
Annual estimated kWh savings: 12,200
Page 29
Item 2.
Traffic Operations, 626 Linden St. (FC1313)
Traffic Operations building is a 9,500 square foot office building built in 2000 located at 626
Linden St. The building’s 2024 reported EUI was 73.9 kBtu / square foot.
As part of the proposed BPS policy, staff recommend buildings of this size not needing to
exceed a 15% reduction from their reported energy use. This maximum reduction cap means
that the City Traffic Operations building will have a modified target to achieve by the 2035
deadline; therefore, instead of the 56 kBtu / square foot target proposed for office buildings, it
will need to achieve a reported EUI of 62.8 kBtu / square foot.
The building’s electric use in 2022 was 109,560 kWh and in 2023 was 108,240 kWh. The RTU
and building automation system projects are scheduled to be completed Nov. 19, 2024. Those
will impact 2025 usage and will appear in the building’s 2026 reported EUI. Projects outlined
below and associated usage reductions will lower the building’s electric use by a projected 39%.
The City also expects to see major reductions in gas use associated with a heating, ventilation
and cooling conversion.
2024 heat pump RTU retrofit
Cost: $557,836
There is no direct Utility rebates available for HVAC rooftop units. HVAC rebates are
provided to distributors to provide access to high efficiency HVAC equipment.
Simple payback: 10.0 years
Annual estimated kWh savings: 27,060
Eliminated one RTU by combining heating and cooling zones in the building
RTU conversion to dual fuel heat pump technology (electrification)
2024 building automation system
Page 30
Item 2.
Cost: $81,200
No rebate available
Simple payback: 12.0 years
Annual estimated kWh savings: 25,000
Page 31
Item 2.
Building Services, 281 N. College Ave. (FC2660)
Building Services is a 37,603 square foot office building built in 1970.
The 2023 reported EUI was 63 kBtu / square foot. The building is required to meet the proposed
BPS office target of 56, or would need to reduce its overall energy use by approximately 11.7%
to hit the target.
Based on a desktop audit, opportunities were isolated for reductions from lighting upgrades and
HVAC controls. Costs were estimated at $107,145 before rebates, or $2.85/square foot. The
desktop audit did not include opportunities from retrocommissioning, noting that City staff
ensure equipment is maintained and calibrated on a routine basis, and the heating and cooling
system is tested and balanced periodically.
After the case study, heating and cooling technicians performed semi-annual maintenance on
the existing RTUs, taking extra time to do more extensive cleaning of the coils and filters (which
build up with dust, dirt, and cottonwood seeds). Based solely on this effort, at no cost, the RTU
performance and energy performance improved to the degree that the building is now meeting
proposed EUI targets. As the City Assistant Energy Manager stated, “Clean coils and filters
equal improved energy and comfort performance.”
Page 32
Item 2.
Community Buildings: Efficiency Works Business
Program Participants
Fort Collins Utilities has offered rebate programs to commercial customers for over 20 years,
accounting for about 60% of Utilities historic program savings2. Efficiency Works Business
(EWB) rebates and incentives accounted for 5,823 megawatt-hours (MWh) reduced electricity
use in 2023, down from 11,492 MWh in 2022. EWB has resulted in a total of nearly 200,000
MWh electricity saved since the program was initiated, which is more than 27,000 homes use in
a year. A significant amount of EWB program participation has been in lighting upgrades,
however many properties benefit from several other rebates and incentives, from grocery, RTU
controls, envelope, variable frequency drives (VFDs), custom rebates on virtually any other
upgrade that save energy, and more.
In recent years, participation in incentive-based programs has waned; Utilities spent half the
money on commercial rebates and incentives in 2023 that were spent in 2022. This may reflect
reduced opportunity in high-impact, low-cost projects with engaged building representatives.
However, engaged building owners have significantly reduced their energy consumption via
participation in EWB offerings, reducing electric use up to 75% below pre-participation usage.
The following case studies represent a subset of local commercial buildings that have
participated in EWB program offerings multiple times over the last decade, including total out-of-
pocket costs, rebate amounts, and electricity saved. While these studies only reflect a small
fraction of the buildings that have engaged with EWB since program inception, these properties
demonstrate significant savings and a range of efficiency projects.
2 Program savings are based on the calculated difference in efficiency from existing to installed
equipment and are customized accounting for building use specifics. For example, lighting
savings factor wattage differences between new and existing bulbs and actual hours of use.
Calculated savings may not align exactly with reductions in consumption due to the range of
other variables impacting electric use, however savings can accurately be viewed as usage that
would exist without upgrades.
Page 33
Item 2.
Local House of Worship
This house of worship is a 29,612 square foot church built in 1969. It also includes the additions
of an administration area built in 1996 and a further expansion in 2022. The building houses a
preschool and a sanctuary with a kitchen, commons and administrative areas. The church was
estimated at just over 16,400 square foot before the 2022 expansion, which added 13,160
square foot. For the expansion, the church partnered with Fort Collins’ Integrated Design
Assistance Program (IDAP).
According to a 2018 facility assessment, there are typically two to eight employees who occupy
the facility daily, however the facility can receive several hundred visitors during services and
other events. Utilities provides electricity, water, wastewater and stormwater services.
Projects
In addition to several facility assessments, this house of worship completed five projects rebated
through EWB, an IDAP expansion project, and benefited from a Midstream Cooling Program air
conditioner. The building’s electric use went down 27% through lighting projects (including
interior lights, signs, classroom lights) and the installation of a high-efficiency air conditioner.
Five lighting projects were completed since 2014 at a total installed cost of almost $19,800.
Rebates paid through EWB covered just below $13,000. Annual electric savings from these
projects total 35,400 kWh / year. Using 2024 commercial electric rates, that’s equivalent to
$3,330 in electric bill savings every year.
In 2023, this house of worship benefited from the EWB Midstream Cooling Program. EWB
works directly with regional distributors to make sure customers have access to affordable high-
efficiency air conditioning units. This program does not provide a rebate paid directly to the
customer, but rather directs funding to distributors to lower costs of efficient equipment. The
Midstream Cooling Program reduced the price of the air conditioning unit by $2,900 and
reduced electric use by 3,025 kWh per year over other comparably-priced units, saving an
additional $285 in annual electric bills.
Utilities’ IDAP provides technical assistance and financial incentives to help architects,
engineering professionals, and building owners optimize energy and demand savings and
reduce operating costs in eligible new construction and existing building major renovation
projects. Building owners receive a more integrated design process and overall, a more energy
efficient building. This happens through engaging the expertise of an energy consultant early in
the project to provide energy modeling services. Key program milestones, such as an early
design charrette (energy workshop) and energy modeling reports help keep energy efficiency
integrated in the design. An incentive of $12,015 was paid to this house of worship as a part of
their IDAP project, which focused on a 13,160 square foot project area and modeled reduction
in energy use of 183,703 kWh annually.
Current energy use
Page 34
Item 2.
As a result of the efficiency-focused projects taken on by staff, the church reduced its electric
use by 27%. Their current EUI of 34.5 is below the proposed Fort Collins EUI target for worship
facilities of 35.
Shared Vision
This house of worship invited 300 people to provide feedback on building upgrades prior to
taking action, and shared with City staff that a big part of their congregation’s shared vision was
to incorporate energy efficiency and to be a sustainable example for the broader community.
This house of worship is one of several in our community to uphold shared community values in
leading by example.
Page 35
Item 2.
Local Small Grocer
This grocer is a 7,500 square foot grocery store built in 1942. At the time of the most recent
EWB assessment, the building was noted to be cinder block construction for the main space
and wood frame for part of the back area. The building has a flat roof with black membrane.
Utilities provides electricity, water, stormwater and wastewater. The facility was sold in 2022,
however work preceding that sale can be compared to use at the time of sale as well as
subsequent use to demonstrate savings associated with EWB projects. Multiple facility
assessments before the sale isolated opportunities to save electricity.
Projects
A total of 12 EWB projects were completed over a 10-year period at this small grocer, with an
additional lighting project in 2004. These projects upgraded the following elements:
Lighting
Refrigeration
Gaskets
Cooler lights
Grocery
Night covers and case lighting
Installation costs for the 2004 lighting project are not available, however total costs for
subsequent upgrades were just under $58,500. Incentives for all projects totaled just under
$28,000 (including $1,750 for the 2004 project). Total electric savings for these projects equals
166,853 kWh of annual savings, or $15,684 in annual electric utility savings based on 2024
commercial rates. This equals a 53% reduction in electric use as of 2021, just prior to the sale
(a 58% reduction over today’s use). The grocer is currently well under their projected EUI target
as set by the proposed Fort Collins BPS (EUI 120, proposed target 148).
Page 36
Item 2.
Local Retail
This retail store is a 46,070 square foot retail store built in 1991. As no assessment was done on
this property, there is limited additional detail available, however the property benefitted from
rebates.
In addition to a recent lighting project, they partnered EWB for a VFD upgrade. Their partnership
saved them nearly $47,000 in incentives paid toward a total of just under $57,000 in work. EWB
covered the entire cost of the lighting project and almost 30% of the cost of the VFD. The two
projects saved a total of just under 183,000 kWh annually, totaling $17,200 saved every year in
avoided electric bills. This building is well below its proposed BPS EUI target, having reduced
total use by 50% with two simple projects (EUI 23.6, proposed target for retail is 49).
Page 37
Item 2.
Local Restaurant
This restaurant is a 6,200 square foot restaurant that opened in 2006. The building was
constructed in 1999. The exterior surface area is estimated to be made up of 20% windows
where a large portion faces east. That exposure brings a lot of daylight into the dining area,
which led the owner to install indoor shading devices, according to an EWB facilities
assessment. Utilities provides electricity, water, wastewater, and stormwater services.
Projects:
Within the last 10 years, this restaurant participated in three projects: gaskets, grocery, and
sushi bar grocery. EWB provided just below $6,000 in rebates for total project costs of $6,630.
These projects save 37,245 kWh annually. That equates to $3,500 in electric costs avoided
every year, using 2024 commercial electric rates. These projects reduced the restaurant ’s total
use by 33%, and its current energy use is well under the proposed BPS EUI target (current EUI
is 197, proposed EUI target for restaurants is 219).
Page 38
Item 2.
Local Strip Mall
This 230,209 square foot strip mall houses large supermarkets, a liquor store, a gym, and
various retail stores. Seven of the businesses within the building’s footprint have
participated in the EWB program, contributing to significant savings across the high -use
building. While this building is covered by the State of Colorado ’s BPS policy, a case study
is provided herein given the variety of projects.
To the north end of the building, 2 businesses have participated in 12 projects, including:
Lighting and sign lighting
Heater controls and electronically commutated motor (ECM) evaporator
ECM in walk in and display cases
LED cooler lights
RTU controller
VFD motors
Gaskets (refrigeration)
Display case doors (refrigeration)
Incentives paid for these projects total $66,442, of $197,608 total project costs before
incentives. Annual electric savings from these projects are 525,096 kWh, or the equivalent of
$49,360 annual electric costs.
Toward the center of the building, 3 businesses completed six projects since 2017 focusing on
food service and lighting, and one Midstream Cooling Program air conditioner. These projects
received rebates of $32,270 and achieved 163,131 kWh of annual savings, or the equivalent of
$15,334 in annual electric savings. While the cost of the air conditioner is unknown due to the
nature of the Midstream Cooling Program, the installation cost of other rebated measures was
$57,387.
To the south end, one business participated in seven rebate offerings, while another business
also benefited from the Midstream Cooling Program. The projects included cooler lights,
gaskets, and lamps.
Total rebates equaled $29,417 of a total installed cost of $56,408 (minus the air conditioner as
its sale price is unknown). Electric savings from these projects equal 382,284 kWh per year, or
$35,935 saved in electric bills annually (based on 2023 commercial electric rates).
In total, the whole building has saved 1,070,511 kWh, equal to over $100,680 in annual bill
savings. Total out-of-pocket costs after rebates was $183,274 (excluding the unknown air
conditioner costs). In total, the projects above reduced overall building electric use by about
17%. This building is meeting Fort Collins’ proposed BPS target (current EUI is 101.8,
proposed EUI target for strip malls is 103).
Page 39
Item 2.
Glossary of Terms
ECM:
An ECM (electronically commutated motor) lowers the total electrical consumption of an air
conditioner or furnace. It helps maintain proper air flow through the system by sensing its
operational status and controls the speed of the evaporator fans.
ECM motors contain a microprocessor, which is the key component of what makes them able to
provide better efficiency. This microprocessor controls the motor to regulate air flow. The motor’s
rotations per minute will either ramp up or down to keep air flow steady. This allows an air
conditioner and heater to work at maximum efficiency. Rather than the motor running the fan at
the same constant high rate, it modulates to adjust for conditions, sometimes running at lower
speeds and using less power than full load. On top of this significant way to save energy, an
ECM motor uses less wattage than a standard motor. Savings occur from full speed runtime
hours reduction and waste heat reduction to the refrigeration system.
VFD:
A VFD (variable frequency drive) saves energy by helping motors operate at the most efficient
speed for any given use. They extend equipment lifespan by decreasing wear and tear and
reduce maintenance costs. Fans and pumps that are turned down just 10% can save up to 25%
in energy costs. In most systems, reducing speed by 50% can cause a 75% drop in energy
consumption. That equals big savings, which can be realized more easily and affordably by
partnering with EWB for local rebates.
Gasket:
A gasket is a common term for any seal between two surfaces. A refrigeration gasket is a
flexible, elastic strip that creates an airtight seal around the edges of a refrigerator or freezer
door. Refrigeration gaskets are a very important part of a walk-in cooler or freezer’s
performance. Gaskets are responsible for sealing walk-in doors and panels to stop any air
infiltration. When gaskets are not working properly, refrigeration units must work harder to keep
their temperature – which in turn generates higher energy bills and wear and tear on equipment.
Gaskets help maintain temperature and improve energy efficiency by reducing the amount of
warm air that enters a cold area, and vice versa.
RTU controller:
A rooftop unit (RTU) controller is a retrofit technology that provides better functionality and
energy savings opportunities for existing RTUs. The U.S. Department of Energy estimates
anywhere from 15% to more than 50% energy savings can be achieved with a one to four year
simple payback potential. There are several features of advanced RTU controllers that
contribute to savings, mostly from the implementation of variable or multi-speed control of the
supply air fan, demand controlled ventilation (which uses CO2 levels in the return air to adjust
the outside air control), and improved economizer control. Some technologies allow for demand
response, web-based remote monitoring, and automated fault detection and diagnostics.
Page 40
Item 2.
LED lighting:
The most common EWB upgrade over the years has been lighting, given its short, simple
payback, ease to upgrade, and aesthetic value. Light-emitting diode (LED) is an energy-efficient
technology that lasts longer, is more durable, and offers comparable or better light quality than
other types of lighting. The high efficiency and directional nature of LEDs makes them ideal for
many industrial and commercial uses. LEDs emit very little heat, unlike incandescent bulbs
which release 90% of their energy as heat, and CFLs which release about 80% of their energy
as heat. LED lighting products also last much longer than other lighting types. A quality LED
bulb can last three to five times longer than a CFL and 30 times longer than an incandescent
bulb.
Page 41
Item 2.
Historic Examples
Many case studies have been documented over the years to demonstrate savings along with
other positive benefits resulting from efficiency projects. As a part of the City’s efforts to outline
achievable recommendations for a local BPS, Utilities completed modeled case studies for the
most common property use types covered by the proposed Fort Collins BPS (office, multi-family,
retail, and strip mall). Those case studies are available at ourcity.fcgov.com/bps.
EWB also publishes case studies from Fort Collins as well as the other partner jurisdictions
(Estes Park, Longmont, and Loveland). These case studies demonstrate various property types
that have participated with the program and benefited from rebates. Those case studies can be
found online at efficiencyworks.org/resources/business-resources.
Utilities has also put together historic case studies, documenting further local partnerships with
EWB. These short, concise studies provide further documentation of the historic success of
EWB, and can be shared upon request.
Through decades of partnership with the community, Utilities has provided rebates and
incentives directly to the community, financed technical support for on-site audits and energy
advising, and direct to manufacturer benefits to reduce the cost of efficient technologies.
These programs have provided many examples of ways local buildings can improve their
efficiency. However, the projected future impact of economic-based approaches to building
efficiency are far short of the outcomes our community tasked the City to achieve in the Our
Climate Future plan. Utilities strongly recommends BPS as a regulatory approach to meet Our
Climate Future goals; indeed, such an approach is the only way OCF targets could be met.
Page 42
Item 2.
City of Fort Collins Building Performance Standards (BPS)
Our Climate Future (OCF) and BPS
Our local community helped shape the City Council-adopted OCF plan. The plan defines success through the
achievement of key outcomes, referred to as ‘Big Moves.’ Steps to achieve Big Moves are defined as ‘Next Moves’ or
strategies. A BPS policy is a Next Move that supports Big Move 6: Efficient, Emissions Free Buildings. Recommendations
were developed to address community and council priorities. BPS is the most impactful direct policy action the City can
take toward advancing Big Move 6.
Policy Impacts
City staff estimate the number of metric tons of carbon dioxide
equivalent (MTCO2e) avoided due to the proposed BPS policy will
go up each year, tapering after 2030, as shown to the right. The
estimate assumes larger buildings meet their targets by 2030, and
subsequent gains in avoided emissions would come from buildings
between 5,000-10,000 square feet.
Once final targets are met, BPS policy savings are projected to be
65,000 MTCO2e each year. By 2050, that equates to cumulative
savings of 1.5 million MTCO2e. If policy adoption is delayed, each
year the community would emit an estimated 10,000 of additional
MTCO2e. This would mean falling short of the OCF greenhouse
gas emission goal by about half a percent each year.
Administrative and Community Costs
Total program cost for BPS is estimated at $270 million,
including administrative and community costs. Accounting
for administrative costs described in the September 2024
City Council Memo, program administration is projected to
be $20/MTCO2e avoided. By 2050, the community would
avoid $630 million in energy costs (represented in the total
area after 2038 in the graph). The policy is expected to pay
for itself by 2038. Also by 2050, the projected benefit of
BPS implementation is $2.80 in energy savings for every
$1 that the community spends on policy compliance. Not
including natural gas savings, community cost is
$105/MWh avoided through increased efficiency, compared
to current community costs for electric rates of $118/MWh
(projected to increase over time).
Economic Levers
Since 2002, Fort Collins Utilities has operated incentive-based
programs, and community consumption has decreased 24%. Despite
steady community growth, incentives have curbed the impact but
have not been able to lower overall electric use. Opportunity in
incentive-based programs is decreasing in the commercial space; in
2023, there was about half the participation in voluntary programs
compared to 2022. The City spent $2.5 million dollars in commercial
incentives in 2023, well below available budgeted incentive dollars.
Policy Development Process
Staff engaged the community for more than 18 months to shape the
proposed BPS policy. An industry Task Force, including representation from commercial real estate and local business
groups (DDA, LLAC, North Fort Collins Business Association, and others), helped determine achievable policy parameters
and a structure that matches our community needs. A Technical Committee of local building science experts further
reviewed achievability of the structure and outlined specific Energy Use Intensity targets unique to building use types. Two Page 43
Item 2.
external vendors assisted with technical analysis. Significant additional engagement included environmental, business,
and community-based groups, other jurisdictions, federal partners, and more.
A Focus on Feasibility
Staff centered engagement on determining what specifics could lead to a truly implementable policy with requirements that
buildings can achieve. This included establishing which buildings could and should be covered and how those buildings
could comply, with in-depth analysis and discussions of unusual case scenarios. This led to the development of several
safety nets tailored to accommodate buildings that may struggle to meet targets, including maximum reduction caps, the
inclusion of which reduced policy GHG savings by ½, but were deemed necessary for technical and financial achievability.
General targets were designed with the short timeline in mind. Proposed final targets are what other jurisdictions consider
‘interim’ energy efficiency targets, based on efficiency stemming from improvements to existing equipment rather than
equipment upgrades.
Supporting Data
Benchmarking Data
Covered building owners provide annual benchmarking data per Article XI, §12-203 of City Code. Building owners report
details including their buildings’ property use type and use specifics, square footage, energy consumption, and more.
Reported data are filtered through 36 flags to determine if they are within normal parameters. Things like abnormal energy
use and drastic changes from previous years are flagged, along with specifics associated with various property use types
like unusual number of computers in offices or bedrooms in multi-family buildings. Buildings that trip a flag can only come
into compliance after speaking to a Help Center staff to explain or correct the abnormal value. About half of the 1,371
covered buildings have tripped flags since the start of the program in 2019. Every single flag has been addressed through
a conversation with the building owner or representative. Current program compliance is over 98%. BPS policy proposes
covering this same cohort of buildings.
Alternate Data Sources
Benchmarking data are considered a primary data source because they are entered by building owners or
representatives. Other data sources are compared to benchmarking data for validation and to provide robust supporting
data for BPS policy development. Reported electric use can be validated against Utilities meter data; reported use is the
more accurate metric in most cases given manual changes to appropriate meter aggregations. Property use type and size
is recorded by the Larimer County Assessor as well as reported by building owners when benchmarking. Reported data
are manually entered by building owners during benchmarking, including adding square footage of each property use type.
These metrics are further verified during benchmarking reporting through conversations with our Help Center. About 97%
of covered building representatives have communicated directly with our Help Center, allowing for verification of
unexpected reported data and error corrections. Adopted BPS policies in other jurisdictions often require third-party
verification of benchmarked data, but Utilities staff are hopeful they can perform some of this based on existing data,
saving building owners administrative time and cost.
To create energy efficiency targets, Utilities worked with two external vendors to review energy data from thousands of
buildings around the country, including but not limited to the following sources:
• Utilities billing and metered data
Efficiency Works Business program data
• Larimer County Assessor records
• City of Denver benchmarking data
• City of Boulder benchmarking data
• ComStock Analysis Tool (U.S. Department of Energy)
• Commercial Building Energy Consumption Survey (U.S.
Energy Information Administration)
• California Energy Data and Reporting System
Over 200 data fields were reviewed per building, and many data outliers were reviewed individually. Staff incorporated
local case studies to further ensure feasibility.
Cost Data
The basis for the local cost information was derived from publicly available cost assumption information, potential studies,
and contractor reporter total project costs (through the Efficiency Works Business program). The BPS Cost Benefit
Analysis considered costs for improvements and electric savings through 2035, without accounting for any necessary
increase in rates to offset increased electric use if building efficiency is not advanced through this and other efficiency-
focused policies. Costs provided also did not include any ‘business as usual’ assumptions, but rather factored 100% of
total project costs (e.g., including costs for equipment already at the end of useful life, upgrades that would happen without
policy adoption, etc.). Total costs per property before factoring in incentives, rebates, tax deductions, and other financial
assistance equal approximately 1% of each buildings’ last purchase price, also aligning with the average cost of a tenant
finish over the last 10 years ($200,000/building). Page 44
Item 2.
Headline Copy Goes Here
Energy Services Program Manager
Katherine Bailey
Energy Services Manager
Brian Tholl
Jan. 14, 2025
Proposed Building
Performance
Standards (BPS)
Policy Framework
Page 45
Item 2.
Headline Copy Goes HereBPS Introduction
2
Purpose of work session #3 on
BPS:
•Share learning from ongoing
community engagement and BPS
implementation in other jurisdictions
•Highlight potential tensions between
this policy framework and other
Council Priorities, e.g.,housing,
economic health
•Discuss trade-offs and possible
paths forward
Page 46
Item 2.
Headline Copy Goes HereCouncil Questions
•Does Council have feedback on a local BPS
framework as a regulatory method of advancing
the community to 2030 and 2050 goals?
•Does Council have feedback on adjusting
proposed timelines, maximum reduction caps, or
covered buildings?
•What other considerations should staff
incorporate into the proposed BPS framework?
Page 47
Item 2.
Headline Copy Goes HereBPS Benefits
Environmental
Health
Physical
Health
Economic
Health
Comfort
Health
Safety
Resilience
Occupancy &
tenant retention
Economic growth,
resale value,
competitiveness
Energy burden
through use and
rate pressure
Natural Gas
impact
Emissions
impact
BPS
Regulatory actions, including
BPS,are necessary for
achieving OCF emissions goals
Page 48
Item 2.
Headline Copy Goes HereCase Studies
Small, Local Grocery
•Lighting, controls, refrigeration,
case upgrades
•$58,000 investment
•$28,000 rebates
•$16,000 annual est. avoided
utility costs
•Reduced electric use by 53%
•Meeting BPS grocery target
Local Congregation
•Upgrades planned to meet
sustainability vision of members
•Photovoltaic installation
•Efficiency upgrades and high
efficiency expansion project
•Staff note improved comfort and
work environment
•Community members now enjoy
the sanctuary in all seasons
Municipal Office
•Modified HVAC maintenance
practices & commissioning
•No capital investment; avoided
potential, expensive HVAC
upgrade
•Reduced electric use by 11.5%
•Meeting BPS office target
Page 49
Item 2.
Headline Copy Goes HereWho’s Impacted
Building owners
Building occupants
Local,
not
meeting
target
<550
People living in
multi-family
buildings
~17,000
bedrooms
People working
in office
buildings
~11,500
workers on
main shift
Buildings are community assetsPage 50
Item 2.
Headline Copy Goes HereCouncil Considerations from Feedback
Community Concerns
•Inequitable economic impacts across different building types
•Accuracy of projected impact on all properties
•Buildings owners don’t have sufficient resources to comply
Recommended Implementation Levers Possible Policy Levers
•Adjustments
•Specialized resources for market
segments
•Increased support
•Educational support
•Technical support
•Financial Navigator
•Modify timeline
•Extend community
deadlines
•Lead with municipal
•Modify target requirement
•Adjust cap
•Modify covered buildings
•Exclude small buildings
or certain property types
Page 51
Item 2.
Headline Copy Goes HerePolicy Lever Trade-offs
Policy
Lever
Potential
Change
Upfront
Economic
Impact
Environmental
Impact
Administrative
Impact
Timeline Extend compliance 3-5
years
Minimal Half-percent of OCF
goal per year
Moderate
Target
Requirement
Reduce maximum
reduction cap by 5%
High High Minimal
Covered Buildings Exclude buildings
5,000-10,000 ft2
Minimal Minimal Moderate
Exclude multi-family
buildings
High High Moderate
Page 52
Item 2.
Headline Copy Goes HereEconomic Impact: Costs and Savings
Average building upgrade simple payback is eight years
$0
$10,000,000
$20,000,000
$30,000,000
$40,000,000
$50,000,000
$60,000,000
2025 2030 2035 2040 2045 2050
Community Cost Before City
Incentives
Energy Cost Avoided
Cumulative energy cost
avoided exceeds total
community costs starting
in 2038
Estimated Building Owner Costs
•$226 million costs exclude rebates,
business as usual assumptions
•$4-5 / square foot
Estimated Savings
•By 2050, covered building owners
would avoid $630 million in energy
costs
•By 2050, BPS economic benefit is
$2.80 in energy cost avoided for
every $1 spent
Page 53
Item 2.
Headline Copy Goes HereLearnings and Opportunities
Other Jurisdictions
•Critical elements:
•Support (educational, technical, financial)
•Role of alternate pathways, rules
•Timeline consideration
Municipal Buildings
•City buildings are ahead on energy performance and meeting targets
•55% of covered municipal buildings are meeting proposed targets
•$5.3 million estimated investment for remaining building improvements
Opportunities
•U.S. Department of Energy grant for community technical and financial BPS assistance
•$4.5 million over six years
•Distribution expected to begin July 2025
Page 54
Item 2.
Headline Copy Goes HereCouncil Questions
•Does council have feedback on a local BPS
framework as a regulatory method of advancing
the community to 2030 and 2050 goals?
•Does council have feedback on adjusting
proposed timelines, maximum reduction caps, or
covered buildings?
•What other considerations should staff
incorporate into the proposed BPS framework?
Page 55
Item 2.
Headline Copy Goes Here
Questions on BPS:
Kbailey@fcgov.com
970-221-6818
ourcity.fcgov.com/BPS
Program Manager, Energy Services
Katherine Bailey
Page 56
Item 2.
Headline Copy Goes Here
Program Manager, Energy Services
Katherine Bailey
Additional Context
Page 57
Item 2.
Headline Copy Goes HereBPS Policy Framework
•BPS sets efficiency targets accounting for
current usage (actual building use represented
in graph)
•More efficient buildings already meet targets
(green dashes)
•Buildings not meeting targets make behavioral
or efficiency changes
•"Caps" are percentage limits on the per
building maximum energy reduction required
(purple dashes indicate buildings eligible for
cap)
•Customized solutions are available for special
circumstances
Through implementation, the City is committed
to communicating required actions, while
providing the right resources and support to
building owners
5,000-
10,000 ft2
10,000 ft2
and above
Covered Office –Energy Use Intensity by Building (kbtu/ft²)
Page 58
Item 2.
Headline Copy Goes HereBPS Overview: Covered Buildings in Fort Collins
Building
Size
Building
Count
Building
Count
Reduction Target Reduction Target Reduction Target Upgrade Cost
(Per Square Foot)
Number of
total
buildings
Buildings
that need to
act
Compliance
requirement
timeline
Individual
reduction cap
Average reduction
to target
5,000-
10,000
square feet
310 200 (65%)2035 15%9%$4.10 to $4.60
10,000+
square feet
780 520 (66%)2030 25%13%$4.70 to $5.10
State
covered
50,000+
square feet
80 60 (77%)2030 29%17%$4.40 to $4.70
Based on 2023 reported benchmarking data; some buildings are campuses which include multiple structures
Page 59
Item 2.
Headline Copy Goes HereMunicipal Buildings
•About 55% of City-owned buildings
already comply with proposed BPS
efficiency targets
•For City-owned buildings that do not
comply with proposed efficiency targets,
staff forecast about $5.3 million of
additional capital funds would be
needed to reach 2030 and 2035
efficiency targets
•A third-party consultant is providing
support; reviewing upcoming projects
and aligning them with local, state and
federal funding sources, including both
tax credits and other up front funding
resources, to complement Budgeting for
Outcomes offers
Page 60
Item 2.
Headline Copy Goes HereFort Collins Community Engagement
Hours People Engaged Audiences
Community Engagement
2023-2024
~175 ~700 Technical, Industry,
Business, Environmental,
Boards, Owner
representatives, tenants,
and more
Learnings:
•Multi-family tenants are significantly impacted by holistic costs
(including utility costs) and face challenges advocating for improved
living conditions.
•BPS compliance costs lead to direct payback to rate payers in
the form of reduced utility costs.
•Significant resources are essential for policy success, particularly
education.
•Awareness and knowledge are key barriers to efficiency.
•Split incentive is ongoing concern.
•Tenant –owner education is essential.
+ additional engagement with other jurisdictions and federal partners
Page 61
Item 2.
Headline Copy Goes HereCommunity Contributors
Community contributors shaped BPS policy recommendations
Equity
Engagement BPS ExpertsTask Force
Industry
Experts
Technical
Committee
Community
Voices
Building
Science
Experts
Experienced
Consultant
Community-
Based
Organizations
Climate Equity
Committee
Scoped
Work
Other
Jurisdictions
Non-profit
and Federal
Groups
Business
Groups
Environmental
Groups
Boards and
Commissions
Page 62
Item 2.
Headline Copy Goes HereHousing Affordability
Multi-family Buildings
R2 occupancy, 3+ stories above grade
•148 covered multi-family campuses (out of 4,136 local multi-
family campuses)
•Average covered campus size: 80,000 square feet
•102 campuses are not meeting targets
•Average cost: $4-5 per square foot, <8 yr simple payback
•17% of total opportunity and costs
•30% of total covered square footage
•Subsidized affordable housing included in proposed policy
•Housing Catalyst projects follow Enterprise Green
Communities criteria (national green building guidelines
specifically for affordable housing)
Page 63
Item 2.
Headline Copy Goes HerePolicy Lever Trade-offs
Policy Lever Potential
Change
Economic
Impact
Environmental
Impact
Administrative
Impact
Timeline Extend
compliance 3-5
years
Minimal –
inflation / NPV
Half-percent per year
progress to OCF
emission goal
Moderate –upgrades
over time
Maximum
reduction cap
Reduce cap by
5%
High –20% of
costs
High –20% reduced
emissions reduction
Minimal –similar
administrative
resources
Covered
buildings
Exclude
buildings 5,000-
10,000sf
Minimal –5% of
costs
Minimal –5% reduced
emissions reduction
Moderate –reduce #
of covered buildings
Exclude multi-
family buildings
High –17% of
costs
High –17% reduced
emissions reduction
Moderate –reduce #
of covered buildings
Page 64
Item 2.
Headline Copy Goes HereCompounding Levers
Estimated impact on GHG savings and costs with overlapping scenarios:
•Excluding multi-family AND cap reduction;
•Excluding small buildings AND cap reduction;
•Excluding both multi-family AND small buildings AND cap reduction
Excluding multi-family
buildings AND lowering
maximum reduction cap by
5%
Excluding small buildings
AND lowering maximum
reduction cap by 5%
Excluding multi-family AND
small buildings AND
lowering maximum
reduction cap by 5%
35% impact on GHG and costs 24% impact on GHG and costs 39% impact on GHG and costs
Page 65
Item 2.
Headline Copy Goes HereEconomics of the ‘Low Hanging Fruit’
Efficiency is cheaper than electric rates
•Administrative & Utility:
•BPS administrative costs are significantly less than
wholesale energy costs per MWh
•Efficiency is cheaper than new energy generation
•Efficiency minimizes need for distribution upgrades
•Community:
•BPS community costs are less than 2024 electric
rates per MWh
Efficiency supports strategic electrification
•Reduces costs community-wide
Page 66
Item 2.
Headline Copy Goes HereEnvironmental Impact –Natural Gas
BPS is a significant
portion of projected
natural gas savings
•More natural gas savings
projected from BPS (3
million therms) than
electrification (2.5 million
therms) by 2030
•Remaining potential
savings are from
proposed regulatory
residential pathways
•BPS enables future
electrification through
efficiency
Do Nothing More Forecast with Past Impacts AND Forecasted Moves Pathway
0
10,000,000
20,000,000
30,000,000
40,000,000
50,000,000
60,000,000
70,000,000
80,000,000
90,000,000
100,000,000
20
0
5
20
1
0
20
1
5
20
2
0
20
2
5
20
3
0
20
3
5
20
4
0
Community Natural Gas Consumption
therms
Forecast
Fort Collins Our Climate Future
Adopted Avoided from
past Energy
Services
and Xcel
Energy
Program
participation
Potential from
Our Climate
Future
Next Moves
Pathway
Supply from
Xcel Energy
Page 67
Item 2.
Headline Copy Goes Here
24
Renewables and Efficiency
Efficiency Enables Renewables
•Efficiency reduces energy use
•Reduced energy use increases impact of existing and new solar
•Efficiency balances impact of electrification
Local Renewables as a Percent of Resource Mix (generation % of operational consumption)
0.1%0.2%0.2%0.2%0.3%0.4%
0.6%
0.9%
1.0%
1.2%
1.5%
1.9%
2.2%
2.6%
3.2%
0.0%
0.5%
1.0%
1.5%
2.0%
2.5%
3.0%
3.5%
20
0
5
20
0
6
20
0
7
20
0
8
20
0
9
20
1
0
20
1
1
20
1
2
20
1
3
20
1
4
20
1
5
20
1
6
20
1
7
20
1
8
20
1
9
20
2
0
20
2
1
20
2
2
20
2
3
with efficiency impact
0.1%0.2%0.2%0.2%0.3%0.3%0.6%0.8%1.0%1.1%1.3%
1.6%1.8%2.1%
2.5%
0.3%
0.3%
0.4%
0.7%
0.0%
0.5%
1.0%
1.5%
2.0%
2.5%
3.0%
3.5%
20
0
5
20
0
6
20
0
7
20
0
8
20
0
9
20
1
0
20
1
1
20
1
2
20
1
3
20
1
4
20
1
5
20
1
6
20
1
7
20
1
8
20
1
9
20
2
0
20
2
1
20
2
2
20
2
3
Page 68
Item 2.
Headline Copy Goes Here
Denver BPS targets
Developed to support local bill requiring
30% total energy savings from BPS
Fort Collins BPS targets
Developed with a focus on achievability
Proposed Denver requirement
updates and considerations
Included in Fort Collins proposal?
Building target adjustments
Maximum Reduction Cap (42%)(15% and 25%)
Waivers for occupancy and financial distress
Local Policy Comparison: Lessons from Denver
Municipal Codes and Administrative Rules
•Denver proposes updates to Administrative Rules
•Municipal Code should allow for (and encourage) rule updates throughout implementation as warranted;
either explicitly (e.g., “every five years there will be a review and change as appropriate”) or implicitly
(through flexible code language)
•Updates to rules don’t have to impact implementation (e.g., alterations to waivers and adjustments only
affect owners not in compliance at target deadline)
Page 69
Item 2.
Headline Copy Goes Here
For More Information, Visit
THANK YOU!
ourcity.fcgov.com/bps
Page 70
Item 2.
File Attachments for Item:
3. Transportation Capital Improvement.
The purpose of this item is to discuss methodology, criteria, and prioritization of the
Transportation Capital Improvement (TCI) HYPERLINK
"https://www.arcgis.com/apps/dashboards/487a19faef3948c2916d68b5445098fc" dashboard effort
and determine if Councilmembers support the draft findings.
Page 71
City Council Work Session Agenda Item Summary – City of Fort Collins Page 1 of 5
January 14, 2025
WORK SESSION AGENDA
ITEM SUMMARY
City Council
STAFF
Dana Hornkohl, Capital Projects Manager
Brad Buckman, City Engineer
Caryn Champine, Director of Planning, Development & Transportation
SUBJECT FOR DISCUSSION
Transportation Capital Improvement.
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
The purpose of this item is to discuss methodology, criteria, and prioritization of the Transportation Capital
Improvement (TCI) dashboard effort and determine if Councilmembers support the draft findings.
GENERAL DIRECTION SOUGHT AND SPECIFIC QUESTIONS TO BE ANSWERED
1. Do Councilmembers support the draft methodology, criteria, prioritization, and findings for TCI?
2. Do Councilmembers have any questions or feedback on the following specific areas of focus: criteria
selection, alignment with goals, and draft prioritized list/dashboard?
BACKGROUND / DISCUSSION
The TCI dashboard is a tool that prioritizes the City’s various transportation infrastructure investments
using criteria aligning with the City’s strategic g oals and objectives.
Draft dashboard: https://www.arcgis.com/apps/dashboards/487a19faef3948c2916d68b5445098fc.
The City has adopted, and will consider adopting, several plans that prioritize specific types of
transportation infrastructure improvements including the following:
Active Modes Plan (AMP), adopted December 2022
o High and medium priority/readiness recommendations including spot and network projects.
Transportation Capital Projects Prioritization Study (TCPPS), adopted September 2023
o Larger arterial corridor and intersection projects.
Strategic Trails Plan (STP), coming before Council in Spring 2025
o Grade separated crossings where trails cross arterial roadways and railways.
Page 72
Item 3.
City Council Work Session Agenda Item Summary – City of Fort Collins Page 2 of 5
TCI does not seek to prioritize maintenance work (street maintenance program), programmatic work
(pedestrian sidewalk program and bridge program), primary transit infrastructure (bus rapid transit), or
trails outside of arterial corridors. These efforts all have dedicated funding sources and are prioritized
based on the specific evaluation criteria for those programs/projects. However, these efforts inform the
scope of work of TCI projects (transit, trails, bridges), as well as the coordination/synergy of TCI projects
(street maintenance program, pedestrian sidewalk program, transit).
In addition, the City has adopted several plans and analyses that speak to our strategic goals and inform
the selection, implementation, and construction of transportation infrastructure improvements including
The City Plan, 2024 Strategic Plan, Our Climate Future, Transit Master Plan, Vision Zero Action Plan, and
the 15-Minute City Analysis.
There is a desire to have a data driven approach to prioritize the various infrastructure projects
recommended by the plans using criteria that aligned with the recommendations and goals of our
governing planning documents. The TCI dashboard was envisioned as a living tool that would accomplish
these goals. The tool could then be updated moving forward including new projects and updating criteria
to match future strategic planning efforts. Newly identified projects can be added as the various
transportation infrastructure plans are updated. The criteria, weighting, and scoring can be updated to
reflect updates in governing plans, and the prioritization list can be reordered to focus on funding
opportunities and sources that emphasize criteria, such as air quality, safety, or active modes. During this
background and discussion, accessing the draft dashboard is encouraged to help provide feedback and
guidance and address questions that may arise.
Alignment with Priorities and Objectives
TCI seeks to further the following 2024-2026 Council Priorities:
2. Improve human and social health for vulnerable populations
3. Advance a 15-minute city by igniting neighborhood centers
6. Reduce climate pollution and air pollution through best practices, emphasizing electrification
8. Advance a 15-minute city by accelerating our shift to active modes
TCI seeks to further the following strategic objectives:
HPG 4 Incorporate a management strategy for all new and existing City assets that address deferred
maintenance and accessibility.
NCV 4 Remove obstacles to build interconnected Neighborhood Centers to accelerate progress
towards our goal for everyone to have the daily goods and services available within a 15-minute
walk or bike ride from home.
C&R 2 Implement criteria and prioritization to manage assets and replace equipment that will revitalize
parks and recreational facilities, as the planned buildout of the parks and trails system continues.
T&M 1 Make significant progress toward the City’s Vision Zero goal to have no serious injury or fatal
crashes for people walking, biking, rolling or driving in Fort Collins.
ENV 1 Implement the Our Climate Future Plan to advance the City’s greenhouse gas, energy and
waste goals; reduce air pollution; and improve community resilience.
To further the City’s priorities and objectives, the TCI team sought to choose prioritization criteria that
directly impacted the scoring of each project. Some criteria overlapped with the existing contributing plans
and others are new to the TCI prioritization effort. The current TCI prioritization criteria are discussed
below.
Page 73
Item 3.
City Council Work Session Agenda Item Summary – City of Fort Collins Page 3 of 5
Criteria (Weighting) and Scoring
Safety (3)
GHG Reduction (1)
Health Equity Index (2)
Regional Significance/Alignment (1)
Synergy
o Coordination with Streets Department Maintenance Plan (2)
o Coordination with Utilities Department Capital and Field Operations Projects (2)
o Ability to further the goals of the Urban Forestry Master Plan (2)
o Coordination with capital projects originating from other entities such as water and sewer
providers like Fort Collins Loveland Water District) and private utilities such as Xcel (1)
Community Benefits
o Bicycle access (3)
o Pedestrian access (3)
Table 1 seeks to show the connection between specific criteria and the priorities and objectives the criteria
seek to address in the prioritization process.
The draft criteria (weighting) depicted above was arrived at after careful consideration and robust
discussion of the various groups that plan, deliver, and maintain transportation infrastructure for the City.
Also included in this dialog were groups that are primarily responsible for advancing the strategic priorities
the TCI seeks to advance. Representatives from FC Moves, Equity and Inclusion Office, Traffic Operations,
Page 74
Item 3.
City Council Work Session Agenda Item Summary – City of Fort Collins Page 4 of 5
Streets, Parks (including Forestry and Park Planning and Development), and Engineering have all played
roles in developing the TCI dashboard. Scoring for criteria ranges between values of 1 to 5. Several
weighting scenarios were considered including options that focused on active modes as well as regional
and federal funding sources. The Draft Score (Base) depicted in the dashboard was also developed
through staff discussion and input.
Environmental Considerations
During earlier conversations with Councilmembers there was a question of how environmental impacts are
considered when prioritizing transportation infrastructure projects. Specifically, environmental impacts are
considered at every stage of the life of a project, from conceptualization to construction. During the
study/plan phase, conceptual projects are evaluated to determine if their environmental impacts are too
great for inclusion for future prioritization and implementation. Impacts to environmentally sensitive areas
such as riparian corridors, wildlife habitat, and wetlands can change the scope of work or eliminate projects
from consideration. Once transportation projects are identified in the contributing plans, the TCI tool helps
prioritize projects using two specific environmentally related criteria: 1) their ability to reduce greenhouse
gas emissions and 2) their synergy with the Urban Forestry Master Plan. During the design and permitting
phase, the project team focuses on minimizing environmental impacts caused by the project and its
construction. Minimizing and mitigating loss of tree canopy, working with various stakeholders to further
their environmental stewardship goals, evaluating projects to provide riparian and wildlife corridors where
they make sense, and limiting the footprint of projects are all examples of how environmental impacts are
considered during the design phase. Finally, providing robust oversight during the construction phase is
key to ensuring planning and design considerations are fully implemented, and that all environmental
regulations are followed by contractors and project partners.
The draft tool includes a fiscally constrained scenario that assumes certain levels of local, regional, and
federal funding consistent with current levels. Assumptions have also been made about the number of
projects that can be completed each year. Projects from the contributing plans have been bundled into
typical capital project sizes based on project cost and proximity. Projects from contributing plans can be
viewed individually or in bundles with TCI numbers. As projects are completed the tool will be updated to
show this progress. The tool can be utilized to identify projects that may be better candidates for certain
types of funding. The draft tool shows projects that are included In fiscally constrained scenario
(Programmed) in orange. Projects that are not able to be completed in this scenario are depicted in blue.
As project scoring is updated, projects may move in and out of the Programmed scenario. For example, if
a particular intersection or corridor sees an increase in serious injury or fatal crashes the safety score may
increase, and the associated capital project will be reprioritized. A draft list of Programmed projects is
included as Attachment 2.
Note: The Strategic Trails Plan has not been finalized and adopted at this time. Once this effort is complete,
the grade separated crossings included in this plan will be updated in the TCI tool.
Primary work on the TCI effort began in April 2024 and Olsson Associat es was engaged to help develop
and implement the tool. The effort was first brought to Council’s attention in August 2023 as part of finalizing
and adopting TCPPS. Updates on progress on the TCI effort were provided to the Council in August 2024
as part of the update on the 15-Minute City efforts. In November 2024, staff presented an update on the
effort to the Local Legislative Affairs Committee. After receiving feedback from Council, staff intends to
present the dashboard to the Transportation Board for additional discussion. The finalized tool, including
a standard operating procedure for updating projects, scoring, weighting, and mapping, will be brought
before the Council for adoption in the Spring of 2025.
NEXT STEPS
Staff will receive and address questions from the Transportation Board and Council. The TCI dashboard
will be finalized and brought before Council, requesting adoption.
Page 75
Item 3.
City Council Work Session Agenda Item Summary – City of Fort Collins Page 5 of 5
ATTACHMENTS
1. Draft TCI Project List
2. Presentation
Page 76
Item 3.
0BTECH MEMORANDUM
10/17/2024
10-Year TCIP Updated Fiscally Constrained TCIP
To: Brad Buckman PE
From:
Project #
Page 77
Item 3.
DRAFT 10 Y EA R TCIP SUMMARY BY YEAR
1. Considerations during draft programming:
a. Capping of annual budgets around $10-$12 million. ($100 million +/- total program)
b. Honoring previous commitments like grant funding timelines or other known project preludes (e.g.
NW Arterial Study for the Shields corridor through downtown)
c. Spatial analysis of time progression (e.g. avoiding construction on adjacent corridors or logical
sequencing of projects along a corridor)
d. Project distribution by plan source.
e. Spatial analysis of investment by council district or similar (in progress)
2. As we review consider:
a. Are there other considerations from those listed above that need to be included.
b. Are the projects or annual programs of appropriate size/scope?
c. Are there critical corridors or intersections that need to be included?
d. What interdepartmental coordination is needed to accomplish the program and is that feasible?
2025 ($2.8 million)
• Begin design for TCIP-002, TCIP-028, TCIP-030, TCIP-033, TCIP-039, TCIP-04, TCIP-078, TCIP-
079
2026 ($10.0 million)
• TCIP-002: S. Taft Hill Road – Horsetooth to Elizabeth – Separated Bike Lanes and spot
improvements
• TCIP-028: N. College – Magnolia to Willow – AMP signal operations improvements.
• TCIP-030: W. Mulberry – Taft to Mason – AMP signal operations and spot improvements
• TCIP-033: E. Harmony – Taft to Lemay – Separated bike lanes
• TCIP-039: Redwood – Vine to Conifer – Buffered bike lanes and grade separated crossings
• TCIP-078: E. Mulberry – College to Greenfield – Adaptive signal corridor
• TCIP-079: Various – Various intersection spot improvements citywide (HSIP grant)
2027 ($11.2 million)
• TCIP-004: S. Shields – Davidson to Mountain (Yr. 1) – Separated bike lanes, spot
improvements, and grade separation
• TCIP-081: Various intersection improvements along Harmony Drive
2028 ($10.0 million)
• TCIP-004: S. Shields – Davidson to Mountain (Yr. 2)
2029 ($11.4 million)
• TCIP-005: S. Shields – Hillsdale to Davidson (Yr. 1) – Separated bike lanes and spot
improvements
• TCIP-020: W. Drake – Taft to College – Separated bike lanes, signal improvements
• TCIP-090: E. Harmony – Mason to Boardwalk – Corridor and median improvements
• TCIP-080: Various – 2027 HSIP Grant signal improvements
• TCIP-029: W. Prospect – Sheely to College – Intersection improvements along alignment
• TCIP-050: Laurel – Sheilds to Endicott – Separated bike lanes and PHB at Armstrong Ave
Page 78
Item 3.
• TCIP-001: S. Taft Hill Road – Elizabeth to Laporte – Intersection improvements, separated bike
lanes
2030 ($11.0 million)
• TCIP-005: S. Shields – Hillsdale to Davidson (Yr. 2)
• TCIP-063: S. College – Carpenter to Harmony (Yr. 1) – Sidepaths, grade separated and
enhanced crossings
• TCIP-037: Willox – Shield to College – Intersection improvements, sidepath
2031 ($14.9 million)
• TCIP-043: Timberline – Prospect to Vine (Yr. 1) – Separated bike lanes s/o Mulberry Median
replacement intersection improvements throughout
• TCIP-063: College – Carpenter to Harmony (Yr. 2)
2032 ($15.0 million)
• TCIP-043: Timberline – Prospect to Vine (Yr. 2)
• TCIP-089: College – Olive to Cherry – Corridor study and various intersection improvements
• TCIP-025: Horsetooth – Horsetooth Ct. to Shields – Sidepaths, signal modifications, and Grade
separated crossings
2033 ($14.0 million)
• TCIP-056: Overland Trail – Drake to Elizabeth – Separated bike lanes with grade separated
crossings
• TCIP-062: S. College – Harmony to Laurel (Yr. 1) – Sidepaths with intersection/median
improvements
2034 ($13.5 million)
• TCIP-062: S. College – Harmony to Laurel (Yr. 2)
• TCIP-031: E. Mulberry – College to Riverside – Signal operation improvements
• TCIP-084: E. Prospect – Heatheridge – Replace signal, minor improvements
• TCIP-015: Lake – Shields to Mason – Separated bike lanes, intersection redesigns, RRFB at
Aggie Trail
• TCIP-016: Centre Avenue/Phemister Road/Rolland Moore/Tulane – Separated bike lanes or
bike boulevard, spot improvements
• Begin design for the following:
i. TCIP-024: Horsetooth – Shields to Mason – Signal operation improvements
ii. TCIP-027: Boardwalk – Harmony to John F Kennedy – Pedestrian crossing improvements
iii. TCIP-049: Elizabeth – Overland Trail to Shields – Separated bike lanes
iv. TCIP-059: John F Kennedy – Harmony – Intersection improvement
Page 79
Item 3.
By Project Count By Project Budget
Plan Source Total Pct. In 10-yr TCIP Total Pct.
AMP (Near-term) 58 112 52% $16,911,800 $41,184,500 41%
AMP (Mid-term) 37 96 39% $37,911,400 $73,301,800 52%
Grants 27 27 100% $5,636,362 $5,636,362 100%
Bridge Replacement 0 9 0% $0 $15,000,000 0%
Median Replacement 30 45 67% $706,130 $1,112,510 63%
Strategic Trails Plan 13 68 19% $6,500,000 $33,500,000 19%
TCPPS 18 44 41% $37,970,400 $218,995,400 17%
Total 183 401 46% $105,636,092 $388,730,572 27%
$0
$2,000,000
$4,000,000
$6,000,000
$8,000,000
$10,000,000
$12,000,000
$14,000,000
$16,000,000
2025 2026 2027 2028 2029 2030 2031 2032 2033 2034
Annual TCIP Expenditures
Constr
ROW
Design
Page 80
Item 3.
Headline Copy Goes Here
Caryn Champine, Director of Planning, Development & Transportation
Brad Buckman, City Engineer
Dana Hornkohl, Capital Projects Manager
TRANSPORTATION
CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT
Page 81
Item 3.
Headline Copy Goes Here
2
Questions for Council
Do Councilmembers have any
questions or feedback on the
following specific areas of focus:
•Criteria Selection
•Alignment with Goals
•Draft Prioritized List/Dashboard
Do Councilmembers
support the draft
methodology, criteria,
prioritization, and
findings for TCI?
Page 82
Item 3.
Headline Copy Goes Here
3
Transportation Capital Improvement (TCI)
It is a tool that prioritizes the
City’s various transportation
infrastructure investments
using criteria aligning with
the City’s strategic goals
and objectives.
arcgis.com/apps/dashboards/487a19faef3948c2916d68b5445098fc
What is the TCI?
Page 83
Item 3.
Headline Copy Goes Here
4
Project Goals and Deliverables
Increased Safety alignment
with Vision Zero –zero
deaths or serious injuries
while traveling on Fort Collins
streets by 2032.
Supports mode shift goals
to further the Active Modes Plan
and Strategic Trails Plan –
50% active modes share of all
trips by 2032.
Better environmental
outcomes with decreased
congestion, mode shift to active
modes, and sustainable design
–supports Our Climate Future.
Page 84
Item 3.
Headline Copy Goes Here
5
Project Goals and Deliverables
Transportation infrastructure needs
incorporated into community, equity and
environment –alignment with City Plan and
Strategic Plan
Supports future BRT planning and
aligns with Transit Master Plan
Page 85
Item 3.
Headline Copy Goes Here
6
Project Timeline & Development
Council/Board
Discussion and
Feedback
•Transportation Capital Projects
Prioritization Study, August 22, 2023
•15-Minute City Context and Work
Plan Progress, August 13, 2024
•Local Legislative Affairs Committee,
November 22, 2024
•Draft Final Report and Tool
Release, January 14, 2025
•Transportation Board, early 2025
Project Development
•Olsson Associates
•April 2024 Kickoff
•Bi-Weekly Meetings
Page 86
Item 3.
Headline Copy Goes Here
Reduce climate pollution and
air pollution through best practices,
emphasizing electrification
Advance a 15-minute City by
accelerating our shift to Active Modes
Advance a 15-minute City by
igniting neighborhood centers
Improve human and social health
for vulnerable populations
Transportation & Mobility
Overlapping Council Priorities
7
Neighborhood
& Community Vitality
Economic Health
Environmental Health
Page 87
Item 3.
Headline Copy Goes HereOverlapping Strategic Objectives
8
NCV 4 Remove obstacles to build interconnected
Neighborhood Centers to accelerate progress
towards our goal for everyone to have the daily
goods and services available within a 15-minute
walk or bike ride from home.
Neighborhood
& Community Vitality
T&M 1 Make significant progress
toward the City’s Vision Zero goal
to have no serious injury or fatal
crashes for people walking, biking,
rolling or driving in Fort Collins.
Transportation
& Mobility
ENV 1 Implement the
Our Climate Future Plan to advance
the City’s greenhouse gas, energy
and waste goals; reduce air pollution;
and improve community resilience.
Environmental
Health
HPG 4 Incorporate a
management strategy for all
new and existing City assets
that address deferred
maintenance and accessibility.
High Performing
Government
Culture
& Recreation
C&R 2 Implement criteria
and prioritization to manage
assets and replace equipment
that will revitalize parks and
recreational facilities, as the
planned buildout of the parks
and trails system continues.
Page 88
Item 3.
Headline Copy Goes HereCriteria Alignment With Community Goals
9
•Eliminate fatal and serious injury
crashes by 2032
•Encourage shift to active modes
Transportation & Mobility
•Strengthen underserved communities
•Support community centers
Neighborhood
& Community Vitality
•Improve resiliency
Economic Health
•Enhance sustainability
Environmental Health
Page 89
Item 3.
Headline Copy Goes Here
TCI
CRITERIA
10
Page 90
Item 3.
Headline Copy Goes Here
PROJECT INTEGRATION –Transportation Capital Improvement
Project Prioritization: Transportation Capital Improvement
ST
E
P
Project Need
& Identification
•Active Mode Plan
•Strategic Trails Plan
•Transportation Capital Projects
Prioritization Study
PRIORITIES, OBJECTIVES, PLANS, STUDIES AND PROGRAMS
ST
E
P
Evaluation
Criteria
(varies by plan/program)
Regional
Significance
& Alignment
Safety Community
Benefit (2)Synergy (4)
Health
Equity
Index
= Includes Impacts to Safe Routes to School
ST
E
P
Project
Lists
Active modes system improvements Laporte Bike Lanes, City Park & Mulberry
Road and intersection improvements College & Trilby, South Timberline
Bicycle/pedestrian grade separated crossings Siphon, Power Trail at Harmony
PROJECT TYPES EXAMPLES
GHG
Reduction
Page 91
Item 3.
Headline Copy Goes Here
12
Evaluation Criteria
Page 92
Item 3.
Headline Copy Goes Here
13
TCI
PROJECT
PRIORITIZATION
Page 93
Item 3.
Headline Copy Goes Here
14
Web Based Tool
Page 94
Item 3.
Headline Copy Goes Here
15
Example Project
Page 95
Item 3.
Headline Copy Goes Here
CONCLUSION
16
Page 96
Item 3.
Headline Copy Goes Here
17
How the TCI helps the City advance a 15-Minute City
Council Priorities Themes for 15-Minute City Strategy
Operationalize city resources to
build and preserve affordable
housing
•Increase housing capacity in areas with strong connectivity
•Support mixed-use neighborhoods
Advance a 15-Minute City by igniting
neighborhood centers
•Expand access to nature and parks
•Increase awareness through education and outreach
Advance a 15-Minute City by
accelerating our shift to active
modes
•Expand the active transportation network
•Expand transit services
•Increase safety conditions for vulnerable road users
Page 97
Item 3.
Headline Copy Goes Here
18
Questions for Council
Do Councilmembers have any
questions or feedback on the
following specific areas of focus:
•Criteria Selection
•Alignment with Goals
•Draft Prioritized List
Do Councilmembers
support the draft
methodology, criteria,
and findings for TCI?
Page 98
Item 3.
Headline Copy Goes Here
Back Up Slides
19
Page 99
Item 3.
Headline Copy Goes Here
20
Strategic Alignment With Our Plans
Page 100
Item 3.
Headline Copy Goes Here
21
High-Injury Network
The HIN is
91% arterials
6% collectors
3% local
Safety
70%
of severe crashes
occurred at an
intersection
8%
of the roads have
63%
of all fatal and
serious injury
crashes
Page 101
Item 3.
Headline Copy Goes HereCommunity Benefit Pedestrian Connectivity
22
Score
Range
Description of Access
and Connectivity
0-20 Very
Poor
20-40 Poor
40-60 Fair
60-80 Good
80-
100
Very
Good
Most or all
daily
destinations
accessible
Little to no
daily
destinations
accessible
Community
Benefit
Page 102
Item 3.
Headline Copy Goes HereCommunity Benefit Bike Connectivity
23
Score
Range
Description of Access
and Connectivity
0-20 Very
Poor
20-40 Poor
40-60 Fair
60-80 Good
80-
100
Very
Good
Most or all
daily
destinations
accessible
Little to no
daily
destinations
accessible
Community
Benefit
Page 103
Item 3.
Headline Copy Goes Here 24
Laporte Ave
•Putnam Elementary, Poudre HS
Power Trail under Harmony
•Kruse Elementary, Colorado Early Colleges,
Harmony School, preschool
Kechter Road Crossing
•Zach Elementary
Timberline Road Improvements
•Bacon Elementary, Kinard Middle
Example capital projects and relation to nearby schools
Mail Creek Trail
•Bacon Elementary, Kinard Middle
City Park Ave and Mulberry Intersection
•CSU, Dunn Elementary
Page 104
Item 3.
Headline Copy Goes Here Prioritization Criteria –TCPPS and Active Modes Plan 25
TCPPS Active Modes Plan
Quantitative -Identify Top Tier Projects
Crash Reduction
Reduction in annual crashes (crashes/year)
Safety & Comfort
Citywide High-Injury Network; Bicycle or Pedestrian Level
of Traffic Stress; Pedestrian distance to low-stress crossing
opportunities
Peak Hour Delay Reduction
Amount of delay reduction (seconds)
Access
Number of nearby Transfort stations or stops
Equity
Fort Collins Health Equity Index (unitless)
Health & Equity
Fort Collins Health Equity Index
Growth
Expected traffic growth from NFRMPO (%)
Network Connectivity
Number of connections to existing or proposed bicycle/trail
network
Page 105
Item 3.
Headline Copy Goes Here Prioritization Criteria –TCPPS and Active Modes Plan 26
TCPPS Active Modes Plan
Qualitative -Final Ranking
Cost
Estimated project cost
Cost
Estimated project cost
Readiness
Additional study, analysis, or permitting? Other exceptional
complexities? Funding source available?
Readiness
Is additional study or analysis needed?
Multimodal Benefit
Supports proposed bike/ped/frequent transit projects?
Multimodal Benefit
Supports proposed bike/ped/frequent transit projects?
Synergy
Supports other currently funded or programmed
public or private projects?
Synergy
Supports other currently funded or programmed
public or private projects?
Community
Addresses community needs & interests based on public
input and identified community activity centers, open spaces,
etc.
No comparable metric
Page 106
Item 3.
Headline Copy Goes Here 27TCIP Dashboard
Page 107
Item 3.
File Attachments for Item:
4. Strategic Trails Plan Update.
The project team has made considerable progress over the last eight months and the (STP) is
nearing completion. The plan enters its third and final phase and it’s an opportune moment to
pause and garner feedback from Council.
Following Council feedback, staff will focus on finalizing the tasks and will develop the draft plan
which will be available for public review in late February. After incorporating final comments, the
plan will be finalized and shared with Council for consideration in May 2025.
Page 108
City Council Work Session Agenda Item Summary – City of Fort Collins Page 1 of 9
January 14, 2025
WORK SESSION AGENDA
ITEM SUMMARY
City Council
STAFF
Dean Klingner, Community Services Director
Mike Calhoon, Parks Director
Jill Wuertz, Senior Manager, Park Planning & Development
Dave “DK” Kemp, Senior Trails Planner, Park Planning & Development
SUBJECT FOR DISCUSSION
Strategic Trails Plan Update.
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
The project team has made considerable progress over the last eight months and the Strategic Trails Plan
(STP) is nearing completion. The plan enters its third and final phase and it’s an opportune moment to
pause and garner feedback from Council.
Following Council feedback, staff will focus on finalizing the tasks and will develop the draft plan which will
be available for public review in late February. After incorporating final comments, the plan will be finalized
and shared with Council for consideration in May 2025.
GENERAL DIRECTION SOUGHT AND SPECIFIC QUESTIONS TO BE ANSWERED
Does Council have feedback on the following?
1. Guiding principles used to develop the Proposed Trails Map
2. Criteria used to prioritize trail projects
3. Proposed strategy to address trail safety
BACKGROUND / DISCUSSION
The paved trail system is one of the most highly valued community assets in Fort Collins, as indicated in
the 2024 Community Survey. Over the span of 45 years, the City has expanded the system to 46 miles of
trails throughout the City connecting community members from neighborhoods to schools, parks, natural
areas, and downtown. Trail planning efforts have been included in several Parks and Recreation plans
since the mid-1970’s and in 2013, the first standalone trails plan was adopted by Council - the 2013 Paved
Recreational Trails Master Plan. Additional goals were also identified in the 2021 Parks and Recreation
Plan – ReCreate.
Page 109
Item 4.
City Council Work Session Agenda Item Summary – City of Fort Collins Page 2 of 9
Beginning in March 2024, an interdepartmental team was formed to update the 2013 trails plan, renamed,
the Strategic Trails Plan (STP). Since March, the project team has embarked upon the planning and
implementation of a robust community engagement process that has led to the development of the plan’s
policies and specific deliverables. To help ground the discussion, below is a recap of the plan’s overarching
purpose and goals:
Plan Purpose
Provide a framework for the future planning, design, maintenance, funding, and preservation of the
paved trail system
Update framework for planning, design, construction, maintenance, and preservation of the paved
trail system
Create seamless integration of a low-stress network (on and off-street systems) to achieve a 15-
Minute City while maintaining the trail system’s recreational value
Ensure priority trail connections are made to underrepresented neighborhoods, schools, parks, and
natural areas
Plan Goals
Assess if the paved trail system meets the needs of community and determine challenges and
opportunities for improvement
Develop shared vision for expansion of paved trail system to meet future needs
Create transparency to trail planning, design, funding, construction and maintenance
Explore and develop new policies to improve current and future paved trail system
PROGRESS TO DATE
1. Community Engagement – Phases I & II
The project team hosted or participated in several community engagement activities between the months
of May and November 2024 to share plan details and to hear from community members firsthand. Activities
ranged from community working group meetings to community-wide events, neighborhood meetings,
boards and commission meetings, and a (regional) Northern Colorado Trails Summit.
The project team also launched the second phase of the online interactive mapping tool to share and
receive community feedback on proposed trails. Since Phase I, this interactive tool has enabled community
members to interact with one another and to agree or disagree with trail observations and ideas for
improvement.
It has proved to be an extremely effective method for reaching hundreds of community members and to
also document public input related to the everyday user experiences, including safety concerns, pavement
conditions, maintenance needs, user interactions, and suggestions to expand the trail system.
Page 110
Item 4.
City Council Work Session Agenda Item Summary – City of Fort Collins Page 3 of 9
The details of these online and in-person activities are fully captured in the Community Engagement
Summary (Attachment 2). The input received from Phases I & II activities is summarized in the following
key themes:
Phase I (March – May)
Trails for all - Everyone should have access to trail opportunities and the planning and design of trails
should account for the great variation in abilities, cultural backgrounds, modes of movement, and
diversity of the community.
Community Connections - Priority connections for the community include neighborhoods, schools,
parks, natural areas, and linkages to other trails.
Interconnected Network - Trails are a key component of the City’s system of facilities for active
transportation and recreation and should be considered congruently with those facilities to provide a
seamless and safe user experience.
Phase II (May - November)
Complement On-Street Infrastructure - Trails should complement, not replace on-street bicycle
infrastructure. In many areas of the city, the existing and proposed on-street infrastructure is low-stress.
Balancing Trail Access - Homeowner concern for loss of privacy if trails are developed within irrigation
ditch corridors and very close to homes.
New Trails in the Northeast - Strong support for investment in NE Fort Collins trails and interim
facilities while future development processes unfold.
Trail Safety Education - Need for additional trail safety education regarding user behaviors/etiquette.
Partnerships Produce Results - Collaborative trail development in Northern Colorado has resulted
in the successful completion of numerous projects that connect Fort Collins to neighboring
communities. The City should continue to leverage partnerships for a coordinated approach to network
development.
2. Draft Proposed Trails Map
The primary focus of the STP is to analyze the existing trail system, to better understand how the trail
system serves the community today, and to re-envision how the trail system will serve the community of
tomorrow. The project team used five guiding principles to develop the proposed trails map.
1. Community Engagement – The public input gleaned in Phases I & 2 were used to create the
foundation of the proposed trails map. Utilizing the on line interactive mapping tool, community
members were able to articulate and document current gaps in the trail network and help staff
understand where they’d like the trail system to go in the future as part of Phase I. In Phase II,
community members were offered the opportunity to react to the proposed trails map generated by
staff using comments from Phase I and several guiding principles.
2. Demand and Growth - This analysis takes into great consideration areas of the city that are continuing
to grow while investigating older parts of the city to determine where trails may be retroactively factored
into the built environment.
3. The 15 Minute City - The paved trail system should not be considered a panacea for creating safe
connections to and from each and every origin and destination, but rather, the system must be
Page 111
Item 4.
City Council Work Session Agenda Item Summary – City of Fort Collins Page 4 of 9
designed to be complementary to the existing and future on-street walking and bicycling systems. The
2022 Active Modes Plan (AMP) envisions, plans and prioritizes hundreds of street projects to make
streets more accessible, safe, and comfortable for people walking, biking, and rolling. A key premise
of the AMP is to develop a Low (Traffic) Stress Network . By working together, the STP and AMP
envision and plan for a seamless integration of the off-street and on-street networks. Further these
plans represent integral components to achieve the 15-Minute City, a Council priority, with the goal of
prioritized connectivity to schools and underrepresented neighborhoods, thereby ensuring equitable
service delivery.
4. Recreational Experience - Maintaining and enhancing the recreational value of the paved trail system
is germane to the foundation of the paved trail system. The future of the trail system can be designed
in a manner that preserves the recreational value by planning a system that provides the following
features:
Cascading or stacked recreational loops that vary in length.
Trail design that emulates the shape of the natural landscape and provides variety.
Prioritization of trails to access Parks, Natural Areas, riparian corridors, and open spaces.
5. Conservation and Resilience - Trails have significant potential as resilient infrastructure that supports
both recreation and conservation, specifically in the following functions:
Environmental Stewardship: Establishing public trails can formalize beneficial social trails,
improving the overall recreation experience while protecting sensitive habitats. The integration of
trail construction with environmental restoration projects brings additional benefits; and by aligning
trail development with wetland stabilization, and stormwater mitigation efforts, trails can create new
opportunities for environmental education and community engagement.
Trails as Resilient Infrastructure: Trails can be designed to serve multiple purposes, including
recreation, active transportation, and climate resilience. By integrating trails into local and regional
transportation networks, trails help reduce carbon emissions by encouraging non-motorized travel.
Additionally, trails can function as adaptive infrastructure, provide flood protection, add to city’s tree
canopy to mitigate heat islands, serve as fire breaks, and support stormwater management.
Using these guiding principles and faced with both opportunities and constraints, the project team
navigated numerous environmental and physical factors to generate a proposed trails map that is feasible
from an implementation standpoint; however, the proposed trails map is extensive and unequivocally
ambitious with nearly 71 proposed new miles of trails and 35 proposed grade separated crossings
at arterial and collector roadways.
The proposed trails map represents at least a 25-year planning horizon, although, the proposed trails map
should be revisited every 5-7 years as the community grows and priorities shift.
Prioritizing Trail Projects
To prioritize trail projects that best meet the needs of the community, the STP proposes two prioritization
models to evaluate existing trails and proposed trails. Existing trails and proposed trails draw different
funding sources, and therefore are not always in direct competition with one another for funds. For this
reason, two models are proposed to account for the difference in existing versus projected data.
The project prioritization framework will equip staff with a framework for reconsidering priorities each year
as the City develops its offers for the bi-annual Budgeting for Outcomes process. The framework will also
help community members understand the anticipated build out of the trail system.
Page 112
Item 4.
City Council Work Session Agenda Item Summary – City of Fort Collins Page 5 of 9
Prioritization can change in response to new funding sources, opportunities, constraints, and community
preferences. Therefore, prioritization can and should be re-evaluated at regular intervals as needs and
opportunities shift. Several criteria were considered as sourced from the several city plans and other peer
cities. The following sets of criteria are proposed for each model.
Existing Trails Prioritization Criteria (Maintenance and Improvements):
Deferred Asset Maintenance
o The STP Asset Assessment Geodatabase, identifies trail sections that pertain to Access
Control needs, ADA Deficiency, Crossing Deficiency, Drainage/Flooding, Erosion, Lack of
Lighting, Narrow Tread/Insufficient shoulder, Pavement Deficiency, Sharp Turns & Blind Spots,
Other). Improves individual safety and safety among user interactions.
Equitable Service Delivery
o Trails that enter or are near the 15-min City Analysis identified Equity Focus Areas (EFAs)
which have been cross referenced with city's Economic Opportunities Area (EOA) map.
Quantitative Level of Service (LOS)
o A quantitative LOS score was calculated for major existing paved travels that evaluated trail
width, surface type, grade changes, and user volumes.
Proposed Trails Prioritization Criteria:
Equitable Service Delivery
o Proposed trails that enter or are near the 15-min City Analysis identified Equity Focus Areas
(EFAs) which have been cross referenced with city's Economic Opportunities Area (EOA) map.
Connectivity to Schools & Neighborhoods
o Closes gaps and/or connects schools and neighborhoods
Recreational Value
o Closes gaps, completes loops, or connects to Parks or Natural Areas
Demand and Growth
o Located in growth areas in alignment with current BFO proposals OR in areas of active and/or
anticipated future development review projects
Completes a Gap
o Completes a strategic segment of trail to connect two or more trails.
From an operational perspective, each discrete project will also be cross referenced with other future
related or adjacent projects and developments to ensure synergy & ease of Implementation. If the city is
able to leverage a project in terms of additional resources, or if the project is considered "low-hanging fruit,"
these factors may influence a shift in the project’s ranking.
Grade Separated Crossings
In 2018, an interdepartmental city team prepared the Bicycle and Pedestrian Grade Separated Crossing
Prioritization Study. This prioritization study established an approach to prioritize candidate bicycle and
pedestrian grade separation locations to direct future investment toward locations that need it most using
an approach of both data and engineering judgement. The study has remained in draft form and has been
a helpful tool primarily for staff to reference future projects.
Page 113
Item 4.
City Council Work Session Agenda Item Summary – City of Fort Collins Page 6 of 9
As part of the STP, the prioritization study is being updated to remove projects that have been completed
and include newly identified projects through the STP planning process. Using the original prioritization
criteria, the new list will be reprioritized and cross referenced against the 15 Minute City Analysis to ensure
conformity.
The design and construction of grade separated crossings have historically been implemented through a
partnership between Park Planning & Development and the City’s Engineering Department. Engineering
typically leads these major projects and applies for state and federal transportation grants through the
North Front Range Metropolitan Organization to help co-fund the projects.
In 2024, the City’s Engineering Department developed the 10-Year Transportation Capital Improvement
(TCI). TCI is a tool that prioritizes the City’s various transportation infrastructure investments using
criteria aligning with the City’s strategic goals and objectives. Of the 35 identified proposed grade
separated crossings at arterial and collector roadways, the top ranked (10-15) grade separated crossing
projects identified in the updated Bicycle and Pedestrian Grade Separated Crossing Prioritization Study
will be included in the TCI for capital project prioritization and future construction.
Trail Funding Summary
Funding for trail planning, design, and construction is primarily obtained from Conservation Trust Funds
(CTF) and Great Outdoors Colorado (GOCO), which are beneficiaries of Colorado Lottery proceeds.
CTF is constitutionally mandated to be distributed directly to local governments, based on population, for
acquiring, developing, and maintaining parks, open space, and recreational facilities, such as trails. The
funds are distributed and monitored through the Colorado Department of Local Affairs. The City of Fort
Collins receives approximately 2.4 million dollars annually to fund trail planning, design, and construction,
as well as partial maintenance of the trail system. Occasionally, CTF funds are also used to augment other
Parks’ projects.
The city may also apply for GOCO grants to provide supplemental funding for discreet recreational-based
projects. A recent example of a successful GOCO grant is the Poudre River Trail project. The recent trail
connections were made possible thanks to a $2 million Great Outdoors Colorado (GOCO) Connect
Initiative Program grant, awarded in 2019 to Larimer County in partnership with the City of Fort Collins and
the Towns of Windsor and Timnath.
The Parks Department will also coordinate with Transportation Engineering and Planning (FC Moves) to
apply for state and federal funding to plan, design, and construct joint projects, primarily grade separated
crossings (over and underpasses). The city’s Transportation Capital Expansion Fee (TCEF) is also a partial
funding mechanism to design and construct grade separated crossings. Current examples of t his
partnership include the future Siphon Overpass and Harmony Underpass projects.
The current Community Capital Improvement Program (CCIP) ¼ cent tax funds have historically
contributed to the design and construction of grade separated crossings and could potentially contribute
to also fund trail projects in the future.
The current Community Capital Improvement Program (CCIP) tax will expire on December 31, 2025. Staff
is currently working to create a package to offer voters as a renewal in November 2025 for a tax that would
run from January 1, 2026, to December 31, 2035. The STP is currently linked to two potential projects:
Strategic Trails Implementation: $10M (tentative) - The Strategic Trail Plan will be completed in
early 2025. Additional annual funding will support the current Conservation Trust funding and expedite
project delivery as developed by the plan. This potential funding mechanism would bolster current trail
funding by approximately 40%.
Page 114
Item 4.
City Council Work Session Agenda Item Summary – City of Fort Collins Page 7 of 9
Bicycle Infrastructure and Overpass/Underpass Program: $20M (tentative) - This program
provides an annual fund to construct bicycle infrastructure as recommended in the Active Modes Plan
(AMP). This fund will combine the previous CCIP Bicycle Infrastructure Improvements and CCIP
Bike/Ped Grade Separated Crossing Funds so will also fund pedestrian over/underpass projects that
align with the AMP and the Strategic Trails Plan, as well as aligns with our Vision Zero action plan.
Lastly, the City has historically capitalized on the opportunity to partner with land developers to dedicate
public access easements and to share the cost to design and construct trail infrastructure. This
coordination is closely tied to sharing the vision of the STP in areas of the city that are still growing, such
as Northeast Fort Collins and other infill and redevelopment projects.
3. Addressing Trail Safety
Over the course of 2024, an emerging theme surfaced through STP community engagement activities at
city events, boards commission meetings, and correspondence with community members and Council - a
need to more thoroughly address mobility safety on the paved trail system.
The issue primarily involves the speed and types of bikes, including e-bikes, that are being operated on
the trail system. The speed differentials between people walking and people biking can be great and in
many reported close call incidents, people moving more slowly on the trail system feel intimidated and are
concerned they will be struck by a faster moving bicyclist. There’s also concern for people operating
devices that are outside of the State of Colorado’s e-bike classification. These devices are considered
“out of class” by the People for Bikes organization and can reach speeds higher than Class 1 & 2 e-bikes.
While crashes resulting in severe injury are rare on the trail system, they do occur. There is a public
perception that our city is lacking in terms of providing a safe environment for people to use a diversity of
mobility options on our trails and that additional safety education efforts are needed so people of all ages,
abilities, and backgrounds feel safe and welcome using the trails. The need to instill a culture of safety and
courtesy on our trails is paramount.
Related to the STP process and trail safety, Park Planning & Development staff are coordinating with FC
Moves on a ‘Which Wheels Go Where?’ project to explore the use of human and lightweight electric
powered devices on city facilities, such as, sidewalks, streets, bike lanes, and trails. This project is moving
forward concurrently to the STP process and is scheduled to seek Council feedback in May 2025.
Trail Safety Strategy
To address trail safety issues, staff is currently exploring a four-point approach that will require coordination
between several departments including, Parks, Natural Areas, FC Moves, Communication and Public
Information Office, and the Fort Collins Police Department. Implementation of this strategy will begin in
2025.
1. Trail Safety Education Campaign – Develop a contemporary and evergreen multimedia safety
education campaign that addresses common safety concerns and provides on-going safety education
messaging and resources, including information and guidance specific to the types of allowed e-bikes,
allowed speeds, and consumer education.
2. Courtesy and Etiquette Signs - Use existing sign design or develop new design and install more
frequently along the trail system reflecting key safety messages of multimedia campaign.
3. Warning Signs and Striping Improvements - Create consistency and refresh centerline striping and
install warning signs at bridges, underpasses, and trail junctions.
4. Bicycle Ambassador Program - Continue coordination with FC Moves to include path patrols and
routine trail pop-up events to provide trail user safety education.
Page 115
Item 4.
City Council Work Session Agenda Item Summary – City of Fort Collins Page 8 of 9
Enforcement Considerations
There’s often a sense that enforcement will solve the safety concerns on our trails however, there are
considerable challenges with enforcement for it to be an effective tactic in changing trail user behavior,
particularly in the long-term.
The existing 45 miles of the paved trail system is patrolled by a small team of rangers from both the Parks
and Natural Areas Departments. Rangers have some enforcement limitations as they are not allowed to
detain or pursue scofflaws. Rangers have the authority to issue citations for municipal code offenses;
however, they often choose to educate people instead.
One method of educating community members involves employing a technique called, ‘Authority of the
Resource.’ This method transfers the authority (or that which asks a person to think or behave in a certain
way) from the ranger to those areas (trails, parks, and natural resources) that have their own requirements.
The technique asks the ranger to subtly deemphasize the regulation and transfer part of the expectation
back to the community member by interpreting the area’s requirements.
Fort Collins Police Services (FCPS) shares a similar position with respect to trail safety and enforcement.
They are faced with a multitude of enforcement issues city-wide. Enforcement is at the discretion of the
officer, and they typically focus enforcement on issues that have the greater threat to public safety.
Spending considerable time on the trail system is not an effective use of their time; however, if an
emergency is reported, both FCPS and the rangers will respond. Parks, Natural Areas, and Police Services
recognize there is a trail safety issue; however, they believe the best course of action is to continue
addressing safety through education and outreach, rather than enforcement.
4. Additional Completed Deliverables
The STP focus areas address existing and new challenges and opportunities associated with growing and
preserving the paved trail system. The second phase of the STP process included multiple analyses,
resulting in key reports and project deliverables that will directly inform recommendations of the plan.
Plan Congruence: Ensuring STP alignment with related City plans is an important guiding principle of
the planning process. The Plan Congruence task included extensive review of existing local and
regional plans, maps, and policy initiatives with implications for paved trail planning in Fort Collins. This
effort included identifying the specific policies, objectives, and recommendations from related plans
that align with or are closely related to the STP Focus Areas, themes, and Council Priorities. This tool
is intended to serve as helpful framework for identifying trail projects that support the goals of multiple
City plans and departments.
Safety, Mobility, and Accessibility: This task involves the review of current safety outreach practices
and ordinances; and provide recommendations to create a culture of safety among users of the trail
system. This focus area of the plan includes the trail safety education strategies previously discussed.
Additional analyses include the following components:
o Quantitative Level of Service Analysis. This analysis calculated a quantitative Level of
Service (LOS) score for major existing paved travels that evaluated each trail according to
width, surface type, grade changes, and user volumes. This evaluation identified existing trails
in the greatest need of improvements relative to the volume of users served, mode split (type
of trail user), and quality of the existing facilities. Roughly two -thirds of existing paved trails
already provide a Grade-A level of service. Of the trails studied, the Spring Creek trail performs
the poorest, with five miles of C- and D-graded trail segments
o At-Grade Trail Crossings Crash History Analysis. Pedestrian and bicycle crashes reveal
potential traffic safety improvements that could be included at select locations. Crash data
Page 116
Item 4.
City Council Work Session Agenda Item Summary – City of Fort Collins Page 9 of 9
trends at the transition zones from on-street to off-street trail network were analyzed for eleven
years of crash data (2012 through 2023).
Asset Management: A maintenance audit was conducted of existing major paved trails to document
observed deficiencies, pavement conditions, known user conflicts, barriers to access, and other known
issues with geo-tagged waypoints. The resulting STP Asset Assessment Geodatabase was used to
create an online, interactive mapping tool for trail maintenance staff to review, track, and prioritize trail
improvements and upgrades.
Irrigation Ditch/Trail Compatibility: The purpose of this task is to evaluate the feasibility of pairing
trails on, along, or across irrigation ditches; and to enhance public transparency to known challenges
and explore opportunities for future collaboration with irrigation ditch companies. This study resulted in
the production of four tools to help guide future implementation of trails along or across irrigation ditches
within Fort Collins Growth Management Area: 1) Irrigation Ditch Company Evaluation Matrix; 2)
Irrigation Ditch Viability Map; 3) Case Studies; 4) Consolidated GIS Shapefile of all Ditches within the
Growth Management Area (GMA).
Deliverables Under Development
Development Review: The project team conducted a thorough review of the City’s Land Use Code as
it relates to trail development requirements to identify amendments that may be necessary to optimize
the code for future trail development by clarifying authority, definitions and terminology.
Design and Construction Standards: Review and update existing design standards to ensure that
new trail facilities can meet the needs of a growing population of trail users. These recommendations
will define trail typologies, design specifications for new construction, grade separated crossing
standards, at-grade crossing standards, and centerline standards.
Project Prioritization and Implementation Scenarios – Utilizing the criteria described above, the
project team will run a model to inform the future build out of the paved trail system. These scenarios
will explore the rates of project construction and build out of the trail system based on current and
potential future funding.
NEXT STEPS
Following the incorporation of feedback received from Council, staff will focus on finalizing the tasks
described above as the fundamental building blocks of the plan recommendations.
Development of the draft plan will take place through February 2025 with a draft plan ready for public
review in late February. Draft plan presentations and input sessions to city boards and commissions will
take place concurrent to public review. After incorporating final comments, the plan will be finalized and
shared with Council for anticipated adoption in May 2025.
ATTACHMENTS
1. Proposed Trails Map
2. Community Engagement Summary
3. Presentation
Page 117
Item 4.
6
6
6
6
6
6
66
6
6
6 6
66
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6 66 6
6
6
6
6
6
66
6
6
66
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
66
6
6
6 6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
S
C
O
L
L
E
G
E
A
V
E
W HORSETOOTH RD
W MULBERRY ST
S
S
H
I
E
L
D
S
S
T
S
O
V
E
R
L
A
N
D
T
R
L
LAPORTE AVE
S
T
I
M
B
E
R
L
I
N
E
R
D
S
L
E
M
A
Y
A
V
E
STRAUSS
CABIN
RD
ZIEGLER
RD
RIVERSIDEAVE
NUSHIGHWAY287
N HOWES ST
9T
H
S
T
W LAUREL ST
W DRAKE RD
E PROSPECT RD
W WILLOX LN
W VINE DR
COUNTRY CLUB RD
S
T
A
F
T
H
I
L
L
R
D
E VINE DR
RICHARDS LAKE RD
REMINGTON
ST
N
OVERLAND
TRL
W MOUNTAIN AVE
E WILLOX LN
TURNBERRY
RD
E TRILBY RD
LANDINGSDR
N MASON ST
W PROSPECT RD
E COUNTY ROAD 38
E MULBERRY ST
JEF
F
E
R
S
O
N
S
T
E DOUGLAS RD
COUNTY ROAD 54G
N
L
E
M
A
Y
A
V
E
N
C
O
L
L
E
G
E
A
V
E
W ELIZABETH ST
WCOUNTYROAD38E
E COUNTY ROAD 50MOUNTAIN VISTA DR
E HARMONY RD
E SUNIGA RD
N
T
I
M
B
E
R
L
I
N
E
R
D
BOARDWALKDR
LINDENMEIER RD
TERRY
LAKE
RD GRE
G
O
R
Y
R
D
E HORSETOOTH RD
KECHTER RD
N
S
H
I
E
L
D
S
S
T
S
C
O
U
N
T
Y
R
O
A
D
5
STATE HIGHWAY 392
W HARMONY RD
W DOUGLAS RD
S
H
O
W
E
S
S
T
MA
I
N
S
T
E COUNTY ROAD 36
S
M
A
S
O
N
S
T
W TRILBY RD
E DRAKE RD
ELINCOLNAVE
CARPENTER RD
JOHNF
KENNEDY
PKWY
E COUNTY ROAD 30
S
U
S
H
I
G
H
W
A
Y
2
8
7
S
C
O
U
N
T
Y
R
O
A
D
1
3
E COUNTY ROAD 52
S
C
O
U
N
T
Y
R
O
A
D
1
1
SSUMMITVIEWDR
S COUNTY ROAD 7
N
C
O
U
N
T
Y
R
O
A
D
1
7
E COUNTY ROAD 48
N COUNTY ROAD 19
INTERSTATE
25
N
C
O
U
N
T
Y
R
O
A
D
5
N
TAFT
HILL
RD
E COUNTY ROAD 54
S
C
O
U
N
T
Y
R
O
A
D
1
9
GI
D
D
I
N
G
S
R
D
N
C
O
U
N
T
Y
R
O
A
D
9
S
C
O
U
N
T
Y
R
O
A
D
9
ARAPAHO BENDNATURAL AREA
BUTTERFLYWOODSNATURAL AREA
CATHY FROMMEPRAIRIENATURAL AREA
CATTAILCHORUSNATURAL AREA
COLINAMARIPOSANATURAL AREA
COTTONWOODHOLLOWNATURAL AREA
COYOTE RIDGENATURAL AREA
EAGLE VIEWNATURALAREA
FISCHERNATURALAREA
FLORES DEL SOLNATURAL AREA
FORMER FRANZ FARM(CATHY FROMMEPRAIRIE NA)
FOSSIL CREEKRESERVOIRNATURAL AREAFOSSIL CREEKWETLANDSNATURAL AREA
GOOSEHOLLOWNATURAL AREA
GUSTAVSWANSONNATURAL AREA
HAZALEUSNATURAL AREA
HOMESTEADNATURAL AREA
KESTRELFIELDSNATURAL AREA
KINGFISHERPOINTNATURAL AREA
MAGPIEMEANDERNATURAL AREA
MALLARD'SNEST NATURALAREA
MAXWELLNATURALAREA
MCMURRYNATURAL AREA
NORTH SHIELDSPONDSNATURAL AREA
PELICANMARSHNATURAL AREA
PINERIDGENATURAL AREA
PRAIRIE DOGMEADOW NATURALAREA
PROSPECTPONDSNATURAL AREA
PUENTE VERDENATURAL AREA
RED FOXMEADOWSNATURAL AREA
REDTAILGROVENATURAL AREA
REDWINGMARSH NATURALAREA
RESERVOIR RIDGENATURAL AREA
RIVER'SEDGE NATURALAREA
RIVERBEND PONDSNATURAL AREA
ROSSNATURALAREA
RUNNING DEERNATURAL AREA
SALYERNATURALAREA
SOARING VISTANATURAL AREA
SPRINGERNATURALAREA
TANGLEWOODNATURALAREA
THECOTERIE
TOPMINNOWNATURALAREA
TWO CREEKSNATURALAREA
UDALLNATURALAREA
WILLIAMSNATURAL AREA
POUDRE RIVER
WHITEWATER
PARK
TWIN
SILO
COMMUNITY
PARK
FOSSIL
CREEK
COMMUNITY
PARK
FUTURE
NORTHEAST
COMMUNITY
PARK
FUTURE
EAST
COMMUNITY
PARK
EDORA
COMMUNITY
PARK
ROLLAND
MOORE
COMMUNITY
PARK
LEE
MARTINEZ
COMMUNITY
PARK
CIVIC
CENTER
PARK
CITY
PARK
SPRING
CANYON
COMMUNITY
PARK
Fossil Creek
SpringCreek
Dry Creek
Spring Creek
DixonCreek
CooperSlough
BurnsTributary
Smith Creek
Spring Creek
StantonCreek
Stone Creek
DryCreek
MailCreek
BoxelderCreek
Foothills Channel
Lang Gulch
Fossil Creek
BoxelderCreek
McClelland Creek
EastPoudreTrail
FossilCreekTrail
WestPoudreTrail
WestSpring
CreekTrail
P
owe
r
Trail
Fossil
Creek
Trail
West
P
o
u
d
r
e
T
r
a
i
l
EastPoudre
Trail
Fossil
Creek
Trail
EastSpring CreekTra
il
Long
View
Trai
l
East SpringCreek Trail
East
Poudre
Trail
Fossil CreekTrail
Po
w
e
r
T
r
a
i
l
Hi
c
k
o
r
y
T
r
a
i
l
Rendezvous
Trail
EastPoudreTrail
Pleasant
Valley
Trail
L
incoln Spur
Trail
MailCreekTrail
Ma
s
o
n
T
r
a
i
l
F01.5 30.75 Miles
City of Fort Collins Strategic Trails Plan
Proposed Paved Trails Overview
Paved Trails
City of Fort Collins Parks and
Recreation - Major Trail
City of Fort Collins Parks and
Recreation - Minor Trail
City of Fort Collins Other
Departments
Other Municipalities
Colorado State University
HOA and Unknown
Active Modes Facilities
Existing On-Street Bike
Facilities
Existing Separated Bike Lane
Existing Sidepath
Proposed On-Street Bike
Facilities
Proposed Separated Bike Lane
Proposed Sidepath
Proposed Trail
Proposed Trail on CSU
Property
Proposed Alternate Trail Route
6 Proposed At Grade Crossing
6 Existing At Grade Crossing
Existing Grade Separated
Crossing
Proposed Grade Separated
Arterial Road Crossing
Proposed Grade Separated
Collector Road Crossing
Proposed Grade Separated
Waterway Crossing
Proposed Grade Separated
Railroad Crossing
Potential Trailheads
NFRMPO Regional Active
Transportation Corridor
Soft Surface Trails
Railways
Rivers/Streams
Canals
Parks
Natural Areas
Growth Management Area
City Limits
College/University
Elementary, Middle, and/or
High School
Page 118
Item 4.
Page 1
CITY OF FORT COLLINS STRATEGIC TRAILS PLAN
COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT SUMMARY
PHASE 1 | MARCH - JUNE 2024
OVERVIEW
This summary presents key constituent and community engagement strategies and results that took place
from March through June 2024. This stage of outreach included a series of engagement opportunities that
engaged approximately 1,826 Fort Collins constituents and community members at the time of this report.
The STP Project Management Team and planning consultants (the project team) utilized a variety of
engagement tools to gather valuable feedback from the community regarding their experiences, challenges,
opportunities, and values related to Fort Collins paved trails. The purpose of these conversations was to:
• Introduce the project and stimulate community-wide awareness of the planning effort
• Solicit candid feedback from a broad cross-section of the Fort Collins community
• Identify key themes, opportunities, local values, preferences, and needs related to paved trails in Fort
Collins
This section is organized into four parts:
1. Summary of Phase 1 events and engagement opportunities
2. Methodology: event format or outreach strategy
3. Results Summary: key themes and takeaways from each engagement
4. Appendix: complete engagement results
PHASE 1 EVENTS
Date Event Location Attendees/
3/4/24 Community Working Group Meeting # 1 215 N. Mason St. 13
4/1-6/1/24 Our City STP Webpage Hits Virtual 2.3k Aware Visitors
4/1/24 –
5/1/2024 Online Interactive Map Commenting #1 Virtual 400
4/30/2024 Executive Directors Hybrid 4
4/15/24 Community-wide Public Meeting #1 Community Center 77
4/24/24 #1 Parks Dept. offices 9
5/8/24 House Kruse Elementary 200
Page 119
Item 4.
Page 2
RESULTS SUMMARY
Over a 12-week period from March through June, the project team engaged Fort Collins constituents and
community members through a variety of methods including in-person and online engagement
opportunities. Each engagement strategy, as well as a high-level summary of the key points and
takeaways from each engagement event are provided below. Key themes that emerged consistently
across all engagement opportunities are highlighted on the right side of each page below. For additional
details, see the complete engagement results at the end of this document.
Community Working Group Meeting #1
To guide the direction and development of the STP, the STP project
manager convened a Community Working Group (CWG) comprised
of representatives from pertinent local organizations and City boards.
The first CWG meeting was held on March 4, 2024 at the Park
Planning and Development office with representatives from the
cycling community, CSU transportation, CSU Geospatial Centroid,
Parks and Recreation Advisory Board, Chichas end Bicicleta, Larimer
County Department of Natural Resources, and the North Front Range
Metropolitan Planning Organization. A member of the Active Modes
Advisory Board will be selected to participate on the CWG at the May 20th AMAB meeting. The CWG
reviewed the STP project charter, community engagement plan, and identified project risks, opportunities,
and draft project goals.
• Utilize Safe Routes to School as a gap analysis that identifies routes that require students to be
driven to school because they are not safe for walking or biking
• Emphasize that the Plan includes diverse user groups (e.g. equestrian, disability) and not just
bikes, with priority projects that benefit both commuters and recreators
• Ensure that community outreach includes Spanish speakers and CSU student involvement
• Identify the best investment and make the choice easy for Council and/or grant funders rather
than pitting projects against one another
• Ditches, a potential bike park that is also open to youths, and trail categories are likely challenges
for planning
• Assess if the paved trail system is meeting the needs of the community and determine
opportunities and challenges
• Develop a shared community vision for how the paved trail system can be maintained and
expanded to address the current and future needs of an ever-changing and growing community
• Be transparent about guidelines, standards, and processes for trail funding, planning, design, and
construction
Date Event Location Attendees/
5/16/24 Disability Advisory Board Meeting #1 Virtual 12
5/20/24 Active Modes Advisory Board Meeting #1 281 North College Sent Memo
5/20/24 and South Skyview North Park 12
6/11/24 Community Working Group Meetings #2 & #3 215 N. Mason St. 16
TOTAL ENGAGED 1,826
Emerging Theme
TRAILS FOR ALL. Everyone
should have access to trail
opportunities and the planning and
design of trails should account for
the great variation in abilities,
cultural backgrounds, modes of
movement, and diversity of the
community.
Page 120
Item 4.
Page 3
• Explore and develop new policies that improve the safety, expansion, efficiency, funding, and
connectivity of the paved trail system
Online Interactive Map
From April 1-May 1, 2024, an online interactive map allowed participants to identify the location of existing
trail maintenance deficiencies, safety issues, personal security concerns, as well as preferred locations
for new connections and amenities by dropping a geo-located pin on
the map. In total, 349 pins and comments were placed on the map
with 158 replies to the comments and 1,053 “likes.”
Results
• Total number of unique comments: 349
o Maintenance comments: 33
o New trail connection comments: 159
o Trail amenity comments: 17
o Other observation comments: 24
o Personal security comments: 7
o Safety comments: 109
• Total number of replies: 158
• Total number of votes/hearts/likes: 1,053
• Top five most “liked” comments:
o “Need access to trail system from the growing number
of neighborhoods in the Northeast part of Fort Collins.”
(Location: Country Club Road and Turnberry intersection; 54 “likes” or votes)
o “Prioritize building underpass below Harmony Rd so Power Trail can be connected in this
part of town. People have died going around on McMurry!” (Location: Harmony Road and
Union Pacific Railroad intersection; 47 “likes” or votes)
o “Either a new trail or heavily protected bike lanes along overland to connect the Poudre
trail to the fossil creek trail. There are no trail connections running N/S on the West side
of town.” (Location: near Overland Trail and W. Magnolia Street intersection; 24 “likes” or
votes)
o “Please prioritize the trail connecting the Poudre Trail and Spring Creek trail between
Overland Trail Rd and the Horsetooth Reservoir.” (Location: near Overland Trail and
Cottonwood Glen/Spring Canyon Community Park; 22 “likes” or votes)
o “Please create a path or truly protected bike lane along Mason St in Old Town connecting
the Mason Trail to the Poudre Trail from Laurel St to Cherry St.” (Location: intersection of
Laurel St. and Mason Trail; 21 “likes” or votes)
Page 121
Item 4.
Page 4
• The majority of comment pins appear to be placed north of Drake Road.
• The Poudre River and Spring Creek Trails received a higher concentration of comments than
other major paved trails maintained by Park Planning and Development. The Mason Trail also
received a significant number of comments, although it is managed by the City’s Transportation
Department.
• Comments in the northeast quadrant of the City were strongly focused on identifying new
connections in existing and planned neighborhoods north of Mulberry.
• Comments in the northwest quadrant of the City identified desired trails along canals and ditches,
and underscored the importance of a trail or active transportation solution along the Overland
Road corridor.
• In the southeast quadrant, comments were concentrated along Spring Creek Trail and identified
the need for improvements and maintenance in many locations. Several commentors specifically
identified the Pleasant Valley and Lake Canal corridor as a desirable trail location.
• Comments in the southeast quadrant were concentrated along the Power Trail and many
identified the need for an east-west connection between the Power Trail and College Ave.
corridor or Mason Trail. Harmony and Trilby Road were identified by participants as urgent needs
for safe grade separated crossings and trail facilities along these corridors.
• To review all comments, visit the interactive map at this link.
Online Questionnaire #1
The first community-wide online questionnaire launched on April 1 and collected
responses through May 1, 2024. The questionnaire was structured to gauge
community satisfaction, attitudes, and perceptions, identify barriers to trail use,
understand mode type and frequency of use, and understand what factors may
increase trail use. A total of 947 responses were collected. Full results are
presented here. Staff synthesized results and summarized key themes below.
Results
When asked to identify ways to better balance the needs of various types of trail
users, the community responded with suggestions that have been broken out
into seven different key themes.
1. New Amenity
• Investments in the addition of new amenities to the trail system could help curb some of
the challenges experienced on the trails. Community members suggested the inclusion of
more trees and benches on the trails to enhance the user experience with an emphasis
on more lighting in certain areas throughout town. The most common amenity requested
was increased signage to help communicate wayfinding, speed limits, and overall trail
etiquette suggestions.
Sample response: “More signage/education about keeping right and passing on the left.
Information about where drinking water and bathrooms are available.”
2. Connectivity & Expansion
• With the increase in density and population growth, the desire for better connectivity and
more trails appeared as a common response. Reasons for an expanded system included
safer mobility access, missing neighborhood connections, and accommodating the
overall increase in population and users on the trail system.
Sample response: “Continue to build more trails, more connectivity so users can disperse
and access close to home, schools, and for commuting. Add more connected, peripheral
trails that increase recreation access close to more neighborhoods around the city,
Page 122
Item 4.
Page 5
including soft-surface trails which can be used by those riding bikes, running, and
more...”
3. Infrastructure Replacement/Improvement
• While many of the questionnaire responses expressed a desire for overall expansion of
the trail system, there was also a clear focus on identifying and addressing existing areas
of trail infrastructure in need of improvement, rehabilitation, or replacement. Many
community members suggested replacing or improving intersections to reduce the
interactions between trail users and vehicles. Many responses also indicated the addition
of a painted center line, or dedicated lanes could help reduce user conflicts.
Sample response: “Create separate lanes on the paved trails for pedestrians and
cyclists.”
4. Maintenance
• Overall maintenance and condition of the trail system was indicated as an opportunity for
improvement to help with the overall usage of the trail system. Focusing on trash pickup
and tree/plant care adjacent to the trails could help to address concerns with blind and
tight corners. Many community members reported concerts with the upkeep of the overall
trail surfaces leading to poor drainage, cracks in the concrete, and poor bridge
transitions.
Sample response: “Clear foliage around blind curves to increase visibility...”
5. Multi-User Interactions
• With the increase in various user types on the trails, many residents expressed the desire
for education for trail use etiquette with a significant focus on bike and pedestrian
interactions. The convergence of different speeds of travel on the trail was a significant
concerns and many responses suggested a focus on speed as a way to alleviate
potential points of conflict between different user types.
Sample response: “More education on trail etiquette. Too many people do not use
audible signals with passing or take up the whole trail without paying attention to their
surroundings.”
6. Trail Widening & Adjacent Soft Surfaces
• With the increase in density and the growth in population, many community members
urged the inclusion of more adjacent soft surface trails, wider trail standards, and the
widening of existing trails.
Sample response: “If the trails were a bit wider, it would be easier to pass and be passed.
Additionally, having more dedicated gravel paths alongside the trails would help runners
enjoy the trails, and to keep them clearer!”
7. E-Bikes/Micro Mobility Devices
• The use of E-Bikes and other micro mobility devices was mentioned as having a
significant impact on the multi-use interaction on the trail system. While the initial
feedback gathered by this questionnaire spoke to E-Bikes, a more focused survey will be
taking place in partnership with the Active Modes Department to address how best to
accommodate these new forms of micro mobility on the trail system.
Community Open House #1
The first of four planned public events for the STP was held on April 15, 2024 to provide a formal in-
person opportunity for the community to be introduced to the planning process and provide input on
needs, preferences, challenges, and satisfaction with paved trails. The open house included multiple
Page 123
Item 4.
Page 6
informational posters with pertinent plan information and write-in questions, and a large 6x8ft. floor map
that allowed attendees to use sticky notes and yarn to identify locations for new trails. Translated
materials and Spanish interpretation services were also provided. Seventy-seven community members
attended the open house.
• The meeting was held in the northern part of the City, therefore comments were representative of
this area signifying a demand for more trails and connections on the northeast side of the City,
including connections to Old Town, the Poudre Trail, and more safe crossings and trails along
Mulberry at I-25 and Vine St.
• Support for trails along irrigation ditches
• Desire for trail signs in both Spanish and English
• Ensure that there are trails that can accommodate all abilities
• Provide trails in underserved and low-income residential areas as well as trails in natural areas
• Requests for engagement through a variety of methods, including open houses, emails, hybrid
meetings, surveys, and public meetings
Page 124
Item 4.
Page 7
Pop-up Engagement
Throughout the spring, the project team capitalized on opportunities
for “pop-up” table engagement at already-occurring events with
interactive engagement activities to increase awareness of the
planning process and solicit feedback and input on key concepts and
ideas. Events included:
• Colorado State University Earth Day (4/22/24)
• Kids in the Park (4/28/24)
• Power Trail & Harmony Underpass Open House (5/8/24)
City Boards
The project team presented to the Parks and Recreation Advisory
Board (4/24/24) and Disability Advisory (5/16/24) Board, at their
regularly scheduled meetings in April and May. The presentation
addressed the STP scope of work, goals, objectives, and discussed
the overall future vision for paved trails.
Neighborhood Meeting #1:
Skyview
The project team held its first
neighborhood meeting in the Skyview
neighborhoods on May 20, 2024. The
on-site meeting was attended by
residents of the area, Council
Member Potyondy, and a
representative from Fort Collins
Natural Areas to discuss the potential
for a connection from Skyview to the
Fossil Creek Trail.
Outreach to Fort Collins Trail User
Groups and Advocates
In April 2024, The City’s project
manager met individually with the
executive directors of several local
trail user advocacy groups including Bike Fort Collins, Your Group Ride, Overland Mountain Bicycle
Association, and the Wolfpack youth mountain-biking program. The meetings introduced the STP project,
an invitation for each organization to involve their membership in the STP engagement opportunities and
collaborate on future engagement events.
Emerging Theme
COMMUNITY CONNECTIONS.
Priority connections for the
community include schools, parks,
Natural Areas, and linkages to
other trails.
Emerging Theme
INTERCONNECTED NETWORK.
Trails are key component of the
City’s system of facilities for active
transportation and recreation and
should be considered congruently
with those facilities to provide a
seamless and safe user
experience.
Page 125
Item 4.
Page 8
Community Working Group Meetings #2 & #3
The Community Working Group met twice in late Spring
to review preliminary analysis of opportunities and
challenges to trail development, evaluate connectivity
needs, known gaps, and potential new alignments. The
CWG received an update on the results of community
engagement and provided feedback on proposed trails
through mapping activities. The May 29, 2024 meeting
focused on proposed trails in the northern half of the City
and the June 11, 2024 meeting focused on trails in the
southern half.
Super Issue Meeting
On June 10th, 2024 the City held its second triannual
Super Issue meeting that convenes all of the City’s
appointed boards and commissions in a single meeting
for the purpose of in engaging in discussion of broader
policy issues and matters not specifically identified in the
stated function of each board or commission. These "super issue" meetings provide an opportunity for
boards and commissions to come together to learn about and discuss key topics or issues. The STP and
Natural Areas Strategic Framework Plan combined forces to present each project as well as highlight the
overlap between the two and coordination to support City Council’s goal of achieving the 15-minute City.
Superboard attendees briefly reviewed the proposed trails map and provided feedback.
Page 126
Item 4.
Page 9
PHASE 2 | JULY - NOVEMBER 2024
OVERVIEW
This summary presents key constituent and community engagement strategies and results that took place
from June through November 2024. This stage of outreach included a series of engagement opportunities
that engaged approximately 2,466 Fort Collins constituents and community members at the time of this
report.
The STP Project Management Team and planning consultants (the project team) utilized a variety of
engagement tools to gather valuable feedback from the community on the proposed trail maps, cross-
agency opportunities for partnership and collaboration, and shared regional values related to paved trails.
The purpose of these conversations was to:
• Continue to stimulate community-wide awareness of the planning effort
• Solicit specific feedback on the proposed trails map and future connections
• Generate regional collaboration, inspiration, and identify future opportunities for partnerships
This section is organized into four parts:
1. Summary of Phase 2 events and engagement opportunities
2. Methodology: event format or outreach strategy
3. Results Summary: key themes and takeaways from each engagement
4. Appendix: complete engagement results
PHASE 2 EVENTS
Date Event Location Attendees/
6/1/24 –
11/25/2024 Our City STP Webpage Hits Virtual 1.4k Aware Visitors
10/1/2024 Which Wheels Go Where? Questionnaire Virtual 1,478
6/26/24 Summer Bike to Work Day Lee Martinez Park 207
9/3/2024 Review Virtual ~500
7/27/24 Fair 400 Hickory Street 46
~14,000
9/26/2024 Northern Colorado Trails Summit Collins 189
Page 127
Item 4.
Page 10
RESULTS SUMMARY
Each engagement strategy, as well as a high-level summary of the key points and takeaways from each
engagement event are provided below. Key themes that emerged consistently across all engagement
opportunities are highlighted on the right side of the page. For additional details, see the complete
engagement results at the end of this document.
Online Interactive Map
From August 19 – September 3, 2024, an online interactive map presented proposed trails and collected
community feedback on the proposed routes, missing connections, and other feedback through geo-
located comments on the map. In total, 248 pins or comments were placed on the map with 177 replies
to the comments and 712 “likes.”
Results
• Total number of unique comments: 248
o Comment on New Trail: 156
o Comment on Missing Connection: 92
• Total number of replies: 177
• Total number of votes/hearts/likes: 7121
• Top five most “liked” comments:
o “Please prioritize this new trail, and don't wait to start work on it. This connection is so
badly needed! This area is frequently forgotten by the city in other efforts and I'm so
happy to see it here. Connecting the neighborhoods in the northeast will allow so many
families to participate in what makes Fort Collins special.” (Location: Country Club Road
and Turnberry intersection;46 “likes” or votes)
o “This would be a very valuable new N/S trail connection to
increase bike commuting for those on the west side of
town to get around. It would be invaluable for those
commuting to and from the Harmony Library, FRCC, and
the new Montessori charter school at ‘Harmony/Shields.
There aren't many N/S bike trails on the west side of
town.” (Location: Pleasant Valley and Lake Canal east of
Westbrooke Court;24 “likes” or votes)
Emerging Theme
COMPLEMENT ON-STREET
INFRASTRUCTURE. Trails should
complement, not replace on-street
bicycle infrastructure
Emerging Theme
PROTECT PRIVACY. Homeowner
concern for loss of privacy if trails
are developed within irrigation
ditch corridors and close to homes.
Page 128
Item 4.
Page 11
o “Timberline/Mulberry area has many businesses but is
dangerous to access by bike, even though it's not
physically far from downtown or the Poudre Trail. This trail
connection to the Spring Creek Trail is important and
timely.” (Location: Timberline Road and Mulberry
intersection;18 “likes” or votes)
o “Happy to see a trail along this canal and through the
Foothills Campus.” (Dixon Canal at north end of Maxwell
Natural Area ;15 “likes” or votes)
o “Is there a plan to cross the railroad here? There is currently no safe way to cross the
railroad between the Power Trail and SE Fort Collins.” (Location: intersection of the
Power Trail, Mail Creek Ditch, and Union Pacific Railroad ;15 “likes” or votes)
• Comments demonstrated strong support for NE Fort Collins trails and a desire for the City to
possibly explore interim solutions to improve active transportation in the near term while
development continues.
• Demand for additional grade separated crossings of Union Pacific
Railroad to access the Power Trail.
• Neighborhood tensions between residents who desire a paved trail
along the Pleasant Valley and Lake Canal and those who prefer to
see the trail remain natural surface.
• Concern along Overland Road corridor that trail infrastructure will
replace existing bicycle infrastructure.
Northern Colorado Trails Summit
On Thursday, Sept. 26, the STP project team hosted the inaugural Northern
Colorado Trails Summit. The event convened nearly 190 representatives
from regional trail development agencies, partners, advocates, user groups,
and supporters in celebration of the history and accomplishments of paved
trail development in Northern Colorado.
The event featured an exhibition hall with local and regional trail projects,
organizations, and initiatives where attendees could network, connect, learn,
and inspire each other with the multitude of exciting trail-related projects
taking place in Northern Colorado.
The Summit highlighted the outstanding regional trail system that our
communities enjoy while looking to the future of paved trails through
presentations from regional speakers, representing Great Outdoors Colorado, Cache La Poudre River
National Heritage Area, and an inspirational keynote address by author and award-winning landscape
Emerging Theme
NEW TRAILS IN THE
NORTHEAST. Strong support for
investment in NE Fort Collins trails
and interim facilities while future
development processes unfold.
Emerging Theme
TRAIL SAFETY EDUCATION.
Need for additional trail safety
education regarding user
behaviors/etiquette.
Emerging Theme
PARNTERSHIPS PRODUCE
RESULTS. Collaborative trail
development in Northern Colorado
has resulted in the successful
completion of numerous projects
that connect Fort Collins to
neighboring communities. The City
should continue to leverage
partnerships for a coordinated
approach to network development.
Page 129
Item 4.
Page 12
architect, Chuck Flink. Attendees enjoyed an exceptional evening connecting, learning, and inspiring
each other with the multitude of trail-related projects taking place in Northern Colorado.
Which Wheels Go Where? Questionnaire
The project team partnered with FC Moves to explore the use of human and lightweight electric powered
micromobility devices on city facilities, such as, sidewalks, streets, bike lanes, and trails. FC Moves
administered a questionnaire regarding the use of these devices to help gauge public attitudes,
perceptions, and beliefs. Common themes from the questionnaire responses included:
Results
• Safety concerns due to speed differentials, yielding the right-of-way, pedestrian safety, and lack
of knowledge on traffic rules and proper etiquette
• Focus on infrastructure and regulation including separate paths, clear rules and signage, and
enforcement
• Accessibility and mobility for older adults and encouraged alternative transportation
• Suggestions for improvement focusing on speed limits, education and etiquette, and flexibility on
rules
Pop-up Engagement
Throughout the summer and fall, the project team capitalized on opportunities for “pop-up” table
engagement at already-occurring events with interactive engagement activities to increase awareness of
the planning process and solicit feedback and input on key concepts and ideas. Events included:
• Summer Bike to Work Day (6/26/24)
• Open Streets Fair (9/15/2024)
City Boards
The project team presented to the Land Conservation Stewardship Board (7/10/24) Climate Equity
Committee (7/22/24), Youth Advisory Board (9/5/2024), Senior Advisory Board (9/11/2024), and Natural
Resources Advisory Board (11/20/2024) at their regularly scheduled meetings. The presentations
addressed the STP scope of work, goals, objectives, and discussed the overall future vision for paved
trails from the perspective of each board.
Results
Considerations and ideas for plan improvement:
General:
• Amenities, such as, more benches, shade structures and additional access to drinking water is
needed.
• Better or increased wayfinding would help as would information at kiosks, including more trail
map availability.
• The use of e-bikes has been very helpful for all types of people to go further, better manage hilly
terrain, and haul cargo (& children)
• Trails do wonderfully at connecting to nature (natural areas + parks)
Safety:
• Promote lights at night for bikes, front and rear
• E-bikers and recreational road bikers need to understand their impact on others in terms of higher
speeds and passing without an audible signal
• Promote dogs on leash
• Separation of trail users (bikes & pedestrians) would decrease conflict at high volume areas
• Prioritize maintenance practices (snow removal) near senior residential areas
• Be mindful of people who are hearing or sight impaired
• Some underpasses need better lighting
• Personal security on the trail is a concern
Page 130
Item 4.
Page 13
Hickory Village Mobile Home Park Resident Resource Fair
The project team attended the Hickory Village Mobile Home Park Resident Resource Fair on July 27th to
increase awareness of the planning process and solicit feedback and input on key concepts and ideas
from neighborhood residents. This event was a Spanish-first engagement effort.
Results
46 attendees
Several students use the Hickory spur to the Poudre Trail to get to Lincoln Middle
Some concern for feelings of security in Soft Gold Park at night and on the Poudre Trail at night in
the underpasses
Connecting the park to the Hickory spur will help further activate this park
Page 131
Item 4.
Headline Copy Goes Here
January 14, 2025
City Council Work Session
Poudre River Trail 2024
Page 132
Item 4.
Headline Copy Goes HereCouncil Feedback
2
Does Council have feedback
on the following?
•Guiding principles used to
develop the Proposed Trails
Map
•Criteria used to prioritize trail
projects
•Proposed strategy to address
trail safety
Page 133
Item 4.
Headline Copy Goes HereA New Vision
Purpose:
•Update framework for planning, design, construction,
maintenance, and preservation
•Support the 15-Minute City initiative
•Maintain recreational value
•Ensure priority trail connections
Goals:
•Meet the needs of community and determine challenges
and opportunities
•Develop shared vision of system expansion
•Create transparency
•Explore and develop new policies
Page 134
Item 4.
Headline Copy Goes HereOutcome Area and Council Priority Alignment
4
Current Council Priorities 2024-2026
•Improve human and social health for vulnerable populations
•Advance a 15-minute City by accelerating a shift to Active
Modes
•Reduce climate pollution and air pollution
Strategic Plan Alignment (2024)
•CR 2: Implement criteria and prioritization to manage assets
and replace equipment that will revitalize parks and
recreational facilities, as the planned buildout of the parks
and trails system continues.
•T&M 1:Make significant progress toward the City’s Vision
Zero goal to have no serious injury or fatal crashes for
people walking, biking, rolling or driving in Fort Collins.
Page 135
Item 4.
Headline Copy Goes Here
5
Council Engagement & Plan Timeline
April 18
Memo
STP Introduction
May 24
Work Session
15-Minute City
Jan. 14
Work Session
STP Update
May
Regular Meeting
Plan Adoption
Phase I
Vision and Needs
March – May
Phase II
Proposed Trails and Policies
June – November
Phase III
Draft Strategic Trails Plan
Dec – May
Page 136
Item 4.
Headline Copy Goes HereCommunity Engagement Activities and Themes
6
Engagement Activities
•2 Questionnaires
•1 Open House
•7 City Board Meetings
•2 Online Interactive Maps
•1 Hickory Village Fair
•1 Council Work Session
•1 Open Streets Fair
•1 NoCo Trails Summit
Phase I
Themes
Phase II
Themes
•Trails for all
•Community Connections
•Interconnected Network
•Complement On-street
•New Trails in NE
•Balance Trail Access
•Partnerships Matter
Page 137
Item 4.
Headline Copy Goes Here
7
Guiding Principles
Community
Input
15 Minute
City
Recreational
Experience
Conservation
and
Resilience
Demand
and Growth
Page 138
Item 4.
Headline Copy Goes Here
8
Paved Trail Stats
Existing System:
•46 miles of trails, includes Mason Trail
•42 existing over or underpasses (street)
Proposed System:
•71 new miles of trails
•35 new over or underpasses (street)
Complete Buildout (~2050)
•117 miles of trail
•77 over or underpasses (street)
Page 139
Item 4.
Headline Copy Goes HereProject Prioritization Criteria
9
Quantitative:
•Equity
•Connectivity to Schools
•Recreational Value
•Demand and Growth
•Completes a Gap in System
Qualitative:
•Synergy and Ease of Implementation
Page 140
Item 4.
Headline Copy Goes Here
Proposed TrailsExisting Trails
Eligible and Potential Trail Funding Sources
10
•General Fund
•Lottery proceeds
•Conservation Trust Fund
•2050 Tax (asset management)
•Lottery Proceeds
•Great Outdoors Colorado (GOCO) Grant
•Conservation Trust Fund (~2M annually)
•Engineering & FC Moves Coordination
•Transportation Grant Funding
•Developer Partnerships
Potential New Funding:
•Community Capital Improvement Program
(Strategic Trails Plan Implementation ~10M)
Page 141
Item 4.
Headline Copy Goes Here
Addressing Trail Safety
Page 142
Item 4.
Headline Copy Goes Here
12
Community Input: Emerging Safety Themes
Infrastructure
and
Regulation
Accessibility &
Mobility
User
Interactions
Page 143
Item 4.
Headline Copy Goes HereSafety Strategy: a four-point approach
13
1.Trail Safety Education
Multimedia Campaign
2.Refreshed courtesy and
etiquette signs
3.Trail widening, centerline
striping and warning signs
at bridges, underpasses,
and junctions
4.Bicycle Ambassador
Program to include routine
trail pop -up events
Page 144
Item 4.
Headline Copy Goes HerePhase III (Next Steps)
14
Meetings and Draft Plan
Development:
•Develop Draft Plan
•City Boards Updates
•Public Draft Plan Review
(February 2025)
•Incorporate Public Input
•Prepare Final Plan
•City Council Adoption (May
2025)
Page 145
Item 4.
Headline Copy Goes HereQuestions for Council
15
Does Council have feedback
on the following?
•Guiding principles used to
develop the Proposed Trails
Map
•Criteria used to prioritize trail
projects
•Proposed strategy to address
trail safety
Page 146
Item 4.
Headline Copy Goes Here
16
Thank you!
Dave “DK” Kemp
Senior Trails Planner
Park Planning &
Development
Parks Department
dk@fcgov.com
Page 147
Item 4.
Headline Copy Goes Here
17
Supporting Slides
Page 148
Item 4.
Headline Copy Goes Here
Major Trail Minor Trail Spur/Connector
Trail Typology
18
•Connects to neighboring
communities
•Promotes long-distance travel
•Regional connectivity
•Suitable for high volume of
users
•High mode-share of
pedestrians, cyclists, and other
forms of active modes
•Adjacent crusher fines trail
•Short trail
•Links Major or Minor Trails to
destinations such as parks,
schools, neighborhoods
•Expand comfortable access to
the trail system for more
people
•Serve fewer users
•Higher share of pedestrians
•Typically constructed in
conjunction with another
project such as a park, school,
or residential development
•Connects local destinations
Short-distance trips
•Suitable for high volume of users
•Lower share of long-range
cyclists and higher share of
runners/walkers
Page 149
Item 4.
Headline Copy Goes Here
19
Trail Use (Annual Comparison)
•Historically, the Poudre Trail at Martinez and Spring Creek Trail between Edora
Park and Rolland Moore Park are the most used sections of trail.
•Mason Trail and Power Trail have an uptick in use the past 4-5 years
Page 150
Item 4.
Headline Copy Goes Here
20
Trail Use (June vs. January Comparison)
Page 151
Item 4.
Headline Copy Goes Here
21
Recreational Trail Loops
•Range of recreational loop opportunities:
•Longest trail loop (Orange) : 38.73 miles
•Shortest trail loop (Red) : 1.36 miles
Page 152
Item 4.
Headline Copy Goes HereOther Project Tasks and Deliverables
22
Completed
•Plan Congruence Assessment
•Quantitative Level of Service Analysis
•At-Grade Trail Crossing Crash
Analysis
•Deferred Maintenance Assessment
•Population-based Level of Service
•Irrigation Ditch/Trail Compatibility
Evaluation
In Progress
•Development Review & Refinement
•Project Prioritization
•Grade Separated Crossing
Prioritization
•Design and Construction Standards
•Funding and Implementation
Scenarios
Page 153
Item 4.