Capital Expansion Fee Study
for the City of Fort Collins, Colorado
prepared by
June 2013
Table of Contents
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ................................................................................................................ 1
Background....................................................................................................................................... 1
Methodology .................................................................................................................................... 1
Demand Factors .............................................................................................................................. 1
Comparative Fees ............................................................................................................................ 2
PARKS .................................................................................................................................................. 4
Service Units..................................................................................................................................... 4
Cost per Service Unit ...................................................................................................................... 5
Net Cost per Service Unit .............................................................................................................. 7
Potential Fees ................................................................................................................................... 7
FIRE .................................................................................................................................................... 10
Service Units................................................................................................................................... 10
Cost per Service Unit .................................................................................................................... 10
Net Cost per Service Unit ............................................................................................................ 11
Potential Fees ................................................................................................................................. 12
POLICE .............................................................................................................................................. 13
Service Units................................................................................................................................... 13
Cost per Service Unit .................................................................................................................... 13
Net Cost per Service Unit ............................................................................................................ 14
Potential Fees ................................................................................................................................. 15
GENERAL GOVERNMENT ....................................................................................................... 16
Service Units................................................................................................................................... 16
Cost per Service Unit .................................................................................................................... 16
Net Cost per Service Unit ............................................................................................................ 17
Potential Fees ................................................................................................................................. 17
APPENDIX A: DEMOGRAPHIC DATA ................................................................................. 19
Average Household Size by Housing Types ............................................................................. 19
Average Household Size by Unit Size ........................................................................................ 20
Existing Housing Units by Type ................................................................................................. 22
APPENDIX B: FUNCTIONAL POPULATION ...................................................................... 23
Residential Functional Population .............................................................................................. 23
Nonresidential Functional Population ....................................................................................... 24
Total Functional Population ........................................................................................................ 25
List of Tables
Table 1. Current and Updated Capital Expansion Fees ................................................................ 3
Table 2. Park Service Unit Multipliers ............................................................................................. 4
Table 3. Park Service Units, 2012 ..................................................................................................... 4
Table 4. Existing Park and Trail Facilities ....................................................................................... 5
Table 5. Neighborhood Park Development Cost per Acre .......................................................... 5
Table 6. Community Park Development Cost per Acre ............................................................... 6
Table 7. Park Cost per Service Unit ................................................................................................. 7
Table 8. Potential Park Capital Expansion Fees............................................................................. 8
Table 9. Comparative Park Capital Expansion Fees...................................................................... 9
Table 10. Existing Fire Stations ...................................................................................................... 11
Table 11. Existing Fire Cost per Service Unit .............................................................................. 11
Table 12. Potential Fire Capital Expansion Fees ......................................................................... 12
Table 13. Comparative Fire Fees .................................................................................................... 12
Table 14. Existing Police Vehicles.................................................................................................. 13
Table 15. Existing Police Cost per Service Unit........................................................................... 14
Table 16. Police Debt Credit ........................................................................................................... 14
Table 17. Police Net Cost per Service Unit .................................................................................. 15
Table 18. Potential Police Capital Expansion Fees ...................................................................... 15
Table 19. Comparative Police Fees ................................................................................................ 15
Table 20. Existing General Government Facilities ...................................................................... 16
Table 21. General Government Cost per Service Unit ............................................................... 16
Table 22. General Government Debt Credit ................................................................................ 17
Table 23. General Government Net Cost per Service Unit ....................................................... 17
Table 24. Potential General Government Capital Expansion Fees........................................... 18
Table 25. Comparative General Government Fees ..................................................................... 18
Table 26. Average Household Size, 2000 and 2010 ..................................................................... 19
Table 27. Average Household Size by Housing Type, 2000 ...................................................... 19
Table 28. Average Household Size by Housing Type, 2006-2010 ............................................ 20
Table 29. Change in Average Household Size, 2000-2010 ......................................................... 20
Table 30. Current Average Household Size by Housing Type .................................................. 20
Table 31. Average Household Size by Dwelling Unit Size, Western U.S., 2011 ..................... 21
Table 32. Dwelling Units by Housing Type, Fort Collins, 2000-2010 ...................................... 22
Table 33. Dwelling Units by Housing Type, Fort Collins, 2012 ................................................ 22
Table 34. Functional Population per Unit for Residential Uses ................................................ 24
Table 35. Functional Population per Unit for Nonresidential Uses ......................................... 25
Table 36. Existing Functional Population ..................................................................................... 25
Prepared by Duncan Associates
360 Nueces St., Suite 2701, Austin, Texas 78701
(512) 258-7347 x204, [email protected]
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
This study provides the analysis required to update the City’s capital expansion fees for
neighborhood park, community park, fire, police and general government facilities. The City’s
capital expansion fees are impact fees that assess new developments for the proportionate share of
the cost of new capital facilities required to serve them at the same level of service provided to
existing development.
Background
The City’s capital expansion fees were originally adopted in June 1996, based on a study prepared by
City staff.1 The fees have been updated periodically to account for inflation, but have not been
comprehensively reevaluated in 16 years. The current community park fees are about 82% higher
than the ones originally calculated in 1996, while the fire, police and general government fees are
about 50% higher than originally calculated. The park fees were increased by 14% in 2000 to
include the cost of irrigation water and required Americans with Disabilities Act improvements.
Excluding this adjustment, the park fees were increased by 68% over the 16 year period to account
for inflation. By way of comparison, the Engineering News-Record Construction Cost Index increased
by 66% from June 1996 to June 2012.
Methodology
The same basic methodology employed in the 1996 study is retained in this update. The overall
methodology is known as “incremental expansion.” The incremental expansion methodology bases
the fees on the existing level of service. The concept behind the incremental expansion
methodology is simple: as a community grows, capital facilities and equipment will need to be
expanded proportional to the growth. The existing level of service, whether measured directly in
terms of cost per service unit or indirectly in terms of an intervening variable, such as acres of
parkland, is assumed to be adequate to serve existing development, but with little or no excess
capacity to serve growth).2
Demand Factors
In impact fee analysis, the demand for services generated by different types of development must be
expressed in terms of a common measure, known as a service unit. For example, residential
population is a commonly-used service unit for park impact fees. For each land use type, the
number of service units expected to be generated by a unit of development is specified in what is
often called a demand equivalency table. In this table, for example, a new single-family detached
home may be determined to house an average number of residents.
Some changes have been made in this update in determining the service units and demand
equivalency tables. The park fees continue to be based on population, but rather than using
City of Fort Collins, Capital Expansion Cost Study, May 21, 1996.
The exceptions are that the new police station is estimated to have about 25% excess capacity to serve future
development, and the new Fire Station #4 is estimated to have about 95% excess capacity.
1
2
Capital Expansion Fee Study
City of Fort Collins, Colorado
1
duncan|associates
May 21, 2013
Executive Summary
population directly, the number of people is translated into equivalent dwelling units, based on the
average number of residents in an occupied single-family detached unit. This approach has the
advantage of eliminating the need to consider occupancy rates, which can be quite variable over
time. Functional population is retained as the service unit for fire, police and general government
fees. Functional population represents the number of people present at a land use, expressed in fulltime equivalents.
While the service units are relatively unchanged, the methodology used to calculate the demand
equivalency tables have been modified somewhat in this update. The park fees are based on
dwelling unit size, expressed in square footage and divided into five size ranges (up to 700 square
feet, for example). To determine persons per unit by unit size, the 1996 study relied on census data,
which does not include information on the size of the dwelling unit. Since the census does provide
data on the number of bedrooms, bedrooms were used as an indicator of unit size. Building permit
data were analyzed to determine the relationship between bedrooms and square footage, and
regression analysis was used to determine persons by unit size ranges. This update relies on a single
data source, the American Housing Survey, that provides information on both number of residents
and unit size. Since the data provided by the American Housing Survey are regional (western United
States), the results have been adjusted to match the overall average household size in Fort Collins.
The basic functional population methodology used in the 1996 study was also used in this update. A
minor change was to simplify the calculation of functional population multipliers for nonresidential
land uses. The 1996 study calculated nonresidential functional population on a weekly basis, with
separate calculations for weekdays and weekends, while this update uses a daily approach based on a
typical weekday.
Comparative Fees
Current and updated capital expansion fees are shown in Table 1. As noted, this is the first
comprehensive update of the City’s capital expansion fees in 16 years. All of the inputs into the
calculation of fees were updated. This update included an inventory of existing capital facilities,
determination of current costs and identification of existing levels of service. Changes in costs and
levels of service, however, would cause fees to go up or down uniformly for all land use types.
Changes to inputs that would affect fees differently by land use type are related to the demand
equivalency tables discussed above. Changes to residential fees by unit size for all the fee types are
the result of utilizing a more direct data source for linking residents and unit size. This resulted in
less variation between the number of residents in the smallest and largest size ranges than was found
in the 1996 study. Consequently, the updated fees for smaller units increase more than fees for
larger units.
The updated park fees tend to be higher than current fees for neighborhood parks and lower for
community parks. Without the additional trail fee, which could be adopted as part of the
community park fee or as a separate fee, the combined park fees would be relatively similar to
current fees overall, although higher for the smallest units and lower for larger units. The combined
park and trail fees would be higher than current park fees for all but the largest units.
Fire and police tend to increase less for nonresidential than for residential units, while the opposite
is true for general government fees. This reflects changes in the functional population multipliers.
Capital Expansion Fee Study
City of Fort Collins, Colorado
2
duncan|associates
May 21, 2013
Executive Summary
While the calculation of residential functional population is simple and unchanged from the previous
study, the calculation of nonresidential functional population requires many inputs, including trip
generation rates, average vehicle occupancy, employee density and average time spent at a land use.
Since the 1996 study did not specify what inputs were used, it is not possible to determine precisely
what input changes were responsible for the residential/nonresidential variability in the updated fees
compared to the current fees.
The total of all updated fees, including the new trail fee, is higher than current fees for all land uses
except for the largest residential units. It should be kept in mind while that the percentage increases
for nonresidential look high, the nonresidential fees are relatively low. For example, the 85%
increase for commercial equates to only $0.55 more per square foot.
Table 1. Current and Updated Capital Expansion Fees
Land Use Type
Updated Fees
Resid., up to 700 sf
Resid., 701-1,200 sf
Resid., 1,201-1,700 sf
Resid., 1,701-2,200 sf
Resid., over 2,200 sf
Commercial
Industrial
Current Fees
Resid., up to 700 sf
Resid., 701-1,200 sf
Resid., 1,201-1,700 sf
Resid., 1,701-2,200 sf
Resid., over 2,200 sf
Commercial
Industrial
Change
Resid., up to 700 sf
Resid., 701-1,200 sf
Resid., 1,201-1,700 sf
Resid., 1,701-2,200 sf
Resid., over 2,200 sf
Commercial
Industrial
Percent Change
Resid., up to 700 sf
Resid., 701-1,200 sf
Resid., 1,201-1,700 sf
Resid., 1,701-2,200 sf
Resid., over 2,200 sf
Commercial
Industrial
Unit
N'hood Comm.
Park
Park
Trail
Fire
Police
Gen.
Gov't
Total Fees
w/o Trail
w/Trail
Dwelling
Dwelling
Dwelling
Dwelling
Dwelling
1,000 sf
1,000 sf
$1,181
$1,515
$1,674
$1,744
$1,868
$0
$0
$1,001
$1,285
$1,419
$1,479
$1,584
$0
$0
$474
$608
$672
$700
$749
$0
$0
$255
$324
$359
$373
$400
$308
$73
$128
$162
$180
$187
$200
$154
$37
$300
$384
$423
$443
$475
$730
$171
$2,865
$3,670
$4,055
$4,226
$4,527
$1,192
$281
$3,339
$4,278
$4,727
$4,926
$5,276
$1,192
$281
Dwelling
Dwelling
Dwelling
Dwelling
Dwelling
1,000 sf
1,000 sf
$937
$1,325
$1,559
$1,791
$2,181
$0
$0
$1,041
$1,477
$1,735
$1,996
$2,428
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
$112
$160
$186
$215
$262
$229
$63
$75
$109
$129
$148
$180
$160
$44
$142
$201
$235
$272
$330
$257
$71
$2,307
$3,272
$3,844
$4,422
$5,381
$646
$178
$2,307
$3,272
$3,844
$4,422
$5,381
$646
$178
Dwelling
Dwelling
Dwelling
Dwelling
Dwelling
1,000 sf
1,000 sf
$244
$190
$115
-$47
-$313
$0
$0
-$40
-$192
-$316
-$517
-$844
$0
$0
$474
$608
$672
$700
$749
$0
$0
$143
$164
$173
$158
$138
$79
$10
$53
$53
$51
$39
$20
-$6
-$7
$158
$183
$188
$171
$145
$473
$100
$558
$398
$211
-$196
-$854
$546
$103
$1,032
$1,006
$883
$504
-$105
$546
$103
Dwelling
Dwelling
Dwelling
Dwelling
Dwelling
1,000 sf
1,000 sf
26%
14%
7%
-3%
-14%
n/a
n/a
-4%
-13%
-18%
-26%
-35%
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
128%
103%
93%
73%
53%
34%
16%
71%
49%
40%
26%
11%
-4%
-16%
111%
91%
80%
63%
44%
184%
141%
24%
12%
5%
-4%
-16%
85%
58%
45%
31%
23%
11%
-2%
85%
58%
Source: Current fees from City of Fort Collins, Ordinance No. 121, November 6, 2012; updated fees from Table 8 (parks and
trails), Table 12 (fire), Table 18 (police) and Table 24 (general government).
Capital Expansion Fee Study
City of Fort Collins, Colorado
3
duncan|associates
May 21, 2013
PARKS
The City provides a number of public park facilities for the benefit of residents. This section
calculates updated community and neighborhood park capital expansion fees.
Service Units
The demand for City park facilities is generated by people. However, it is preferable to base the
service unit on housing units, since the number of housing units can be more easily determined than
the number of people, which is affected by highly variable occupancy rates. The proposed service
unit for the park impact fee update is an equivalent dwelling unit or EDU. An EDU represents the
average number of people living in a single-family detached dwelling unit. A single-family home is
by definition one park service unit. The number of service units associated with other types and
sizes of dwelling units is determined by dividing average household size of that housing type by the
average household size of a single-family unit. The resulting service unit multipliers are presented in
Table 2.
Table 2. Park Service Unit Multipliers
Housing Type
Single-Family Detached
Multi-Family
Residential, up to 700 sq. ft.
Residential, 701-1,200 sq. ft.
Residential, 1,201-1,700 sq. ft.
Residential, 1,701-2,200 sq. ft.
Residential, over 2,200 sq. ft.
Unit
Dwelling
Dwelling
Dwelling
Dwelling
Dwelling
Dwelling
Dwelling
Average
HH Size
2.76
1.85
1.86
2.38
2.62
2.73
2.93
Single-Family
Avg. HH Size
2.76
2.76
2.76
2.76
2.76
2.76
2.76
EDUs/
Unit
1.00
0.67
0.67
0.86
0.95
0.99
1.06
Source: Average household size from Table 30 and Table 31 in Appendix A; EDUs/unit is average
household size divided by single-family average household size.
The existing number of service units can be determined by multiplying the estimated number of
housing units by the service unit multipliers for each housing type and summing. Existing service
units (EDUs) in the City of Fort Collins are calculated in Table 3.
Table 3. Park Service Units, 2012
Housing Type
Single-Family Detached
Multi-Family
Total
Existing
Units
35,838
25,846
Unit
Dwelling
Dwelling
EDUs/
Unit
1.00
0.67
Existing
EDUs
35,838
17,317
53,155
Source: Existing units from Table 33 in Appendix A; EDUs per unit from Table 2.
Capital Expansion Fee Study
City of Fort Collins, Colorado
4
duncan|associates
May 21, 2013
Parks
Cost per Service Unit
The City of Fort Collins provides a variety of parks and recreation facilities for it residents. Existing
park and trail facilities are summarized in Table 4.
Table 4. Existing Park and Trail Facilities
Park Facility Type
Developed Community
Developed Neighborhood
Developed Pocket
Total Developed Acres
Undeveloped Parks/Natural Features
Total Park Acres
Trails
Number
6
27
11
4
Acres
507.65
352.48
14.83
874.96
75.75
950.71
121.24
Source: City of Fort Collins Park Planning, December 4, 2012 and
January 8, 2013.
The cost per acre to develop a neighborhood park is shown in Table 5.
Table 5. Neighborhood Park Development Cost per Acre
General conditions, mobilization
Traffic control
Adjacent street improvements
Access drive and parking lot
Domestic water system
Sanitory sewer system
Demolition
Topsoil management
Storm drainage improvements
Earthwork
Electrical service
Underground irrigation system
Lined irrigation pond
Irrigation pump house and pumps
Raw water delivery system
Restroom
Picnic shelter(2)
Playground infrastructure
Playground equipment/surface
Sidewalks - concrete
Plaza area
Special feature - multi-use pad
Ballfield
Site lighting
Landscape, trees, etc.
Soil prep, and seeding
Bike racks, picnic tables, etc.
Contingency and change orders
Subtotal, Construction
$60,000
$7,000
$15,000
$20,000
$17,000
$25,000
$7,000
$25,000
$15,000
$70,000
$15,000
$70,000
$65,000
$85,000
$15,000
$200,000
$55,000
$25,000
$70,000
$20,000
$20,000
$35,000
$30,000
$5,000
$45,000
$45,000
$10,000
$107,100
$1,178,100
Site survey and plat
Environmental studies
Landscape architecture firm
Architect
Engineering firm
Soils evaluation/testing
Irrigation design
As-built stormwater survey
Stormwater analysis/floodplain
Subtotal, Consultant Fees
$7,000
$10,000
$6,000
$30,000
$15,000
$8,000
$6,000
$5,000
$15,000
$102,000
Street oversizing and local
Light & Power charges
Water plant investment fee
Raw water fee
Sewer plant investment fee
Plan check and permit fees
Stormwater drainage fees
Subtotal, Development Fees
$5,000
$7,000
$15,000
$10,000
$3,500
$2,000
$6,000
$48,500
Administration
Park mainteance facility
APP
Raw water for irrigaiton
Total Development Cost
÷ Acres
Development Cost per Acre
$80,000
$30,000
$11,781
$80,000
$1,530,381
6.8
$225,056
Source: City of Fort Collins Park Planning, December 4, 2012 (2011 pricing).
Capital Expansion Fee Study
City of Fort Collins, Colorado
5
duncan|associates
May 21, 2013
Parks
The cost per acre to develop a community park is shown in Table 6.
Table 6. Community Park Development Cost per Acre
General conditions
Traffic control
Adjacent street improvements
Access drive and parking lots
Domestic water system
Sanitary sewer system
Demolition
Topsoil removal/replacement
Earthwork
Strom drainage improvements
Electrical & telecomm. service
Underground irrigation system
Lined irrigation pond
Irigation pumphouse & pump
Raw water delivery system
Restrooms
Picnic shelter (4)
Playground infrastructure
Playground equipment
Sidewalks concrete/gravel paths
Plaza areas
Special features, bike trials, etc.
Ballfield (2)
Skate park
Dog park with pond
Tennis courts
Basketball courts
Splash park complete
Site features, walls, etc.
Site trail bridges, culverts, etc.
Site fencing
Site lighting: ball fields, tennis, etc.
Landscape, trees, etc.
Soil prep and seeding
$250,000
$10,000
$100,000
$840,000
$60,000
$55,000
$40,000
$50,000
$475,000
$100,000
$300,000
$500,000
$60,000
$80,000
$25,000
$470,000
$350,000
$300,000
$500,000
$220,000
$163,000
$10,000
$80,000
$200,000
$120,000
$80,000
$120,000
$150,000
$240,000
$90,000
$100,000
$300,000
$500,000
$400,000
Bike racks, picnic tables, entry, etc.
Signage
Maintenance facility
Contingency and change orders
Subtotal, Construction
$250,000
$50,000
$200,000
$783,800
$7,338,000
Site survey and plat
Environmental studies
Landscape Architecture firm
Architecture
Engineering firm
Soils engineer site evaluation
Soils engineer construction testing
Irrigation design
As-built survey w/stormwater need
Stormwater analysis
Subtotal, Consultant Fees
$10,000
$15,000
$300,000
$80,000
$100,000
$35,000
$40,000
$70,000
$15,000
$10,000
$675,000
Street oversizing and local
Light & Power charges
Water plant investment fee
Raw water fee- domestic
Sewer plant investment fee
Plan check and permit fees
Public R.O.W. inspection fees
Storm drainage fee
Subtotal, Development Fees
$70,000
$140,000
$5,000
$7,000
$2,500
$45,000
$45,000
$15,000
$329,500
Administration
Art in Public Places
Raw water
Total Development Cost
÷ Acres
Development Cost per Acre
$160,000
$95,000
$300,000
$8,897,500
74.6
$119,269
Source: City of Fort Collins Parks Department, December 2012 (2011 pricing).
The existing level of service can be expressed in terms of the current cost per service unit, as shown
in Table 7. The total cost represents the expenditure that would be required to acquire the amount
of existing developed park land and to develop that land as parks and trails at today’s prices. The
trail cost per mile is based on a standard per mile construction cost, plus the proportional per-mile
cost of the 23 existing underpasses. The total cost is divided by the existing number of service units
to determine the cost per service unit to provide the same level of service to future residents.
Capital Expansion Fee Study
City of Fort Collins, Colorado
6
duncan|associates
May 21, 2013
Parks
Table 7. Park Cost per Service Unit
Developed Acres
x Development Cost per Acre
Existing Park Facility Cost
Total Acres
x Land Cost per Acre
Existing Park Land Cost
Neighborhood/
Pocket Parks
367.31
$225,056
$82,665,319
Community
Parks
507.65
$119,269
$60,546,908
Trails
na
na
na
367.31
$30,000
$11,019,300
628.89
$30,000
$18,866,700
na
na
na
na
na
na
na
na
na
34.00
$1,104,626
$37,557,284
$93,684,619
53,155
$1,762
$79,413,608
53,155
$1,494
$37,557,284
53,155
$707
Miles of Trails
x Construction Cost per Mile
Existing Trail Cost
Total Existing Facility Cost
÷ Existing EDUs
Cost per EDU
Source: Developed and total acres from Table 4; development cost per acre from Table 5 and
Table 6; land cost per acre, miles of trails and trail cost per mile from Park Planning, December
5, 2012, January 18, 2013 and February 1, 2013; existing EDUs from Table 3.
Net Cost per Service Unit
Impact fees should be reduced in order to account for other types of revenues that will be generated
by new development and used to fund capacity-expanding improvements of the same type as those
to be funded by the impact fees. Cases in which such a credit is warranted include funding of
existing deficiencies and outstanding debt payments on existing facilities. Since the fees are based
on the existing level of service, there are no deficiencies. The City has no outstanding debt on past
park or trail improvements. Consequently, no credits against the park impact fee are required based
on these criteria, and the net cost per service unit is the same as the cost per service unit calculated
above.
Potential Fees
The maximum neighborhood park, community park and trail capital expansion fees that may be
adopted by the City based on this study are determined by multiplying the number of service units
generated by a dwelling unit by the net cost per service unit. The resulting fee schedules are
presented in Table 8. Two options are shown: fees by housing type (single-family and multi-family)
and fees by unit size.
Capital Expansion Fee Study
City of Fort Collins, Colorado
7
duncan|associates
May 21, 2013
Parks
Table 8. Potential Park Capital Expansion Fees
Land Use Type
Neighborhood Parks
Single-Family Detached
Multi-Family
Residential, up to 700 sq. ft.
Residential, 701-1,200 sq. ft.
Residential, 1,201-1,700 sq. ft.
Residential, 1,701-2,200 sq. ft.
Residential, over 2,200 sq. ft.
Community Parks
Single-Family Detached
Multi-Family
Residential, up to 700 sq. ft.
Residential, 701-1,200 sq. ft.
Residential, 1,201-1,700 sq. ft.
Residential, 1,701-2,200 sq. ft.
Residential, over 2,200 sq. ft.
Trails
Single-Family Detached
Multi-Family
Residential, up to 700 sq. ft.
Residential, 701-1,200 sq. ft.
Residential, 1,201-1,700 sq. ft.
Residential, 1,701-2,200 sq. ft.
Residential, over 2,200 sq. ft.
Unit
EDUs/
per Unit
Net Cost/
EDU
Net Cost/
Unit
Dwelling
Dwelling
Dwelling
Dwelling
Dwelling
Dwelling
Dwelling
1.00
0.67
0.67
0.86
0.95
0.99
1.06
$1,762
$1,762
$1,762
$1,762
$1,762
$1,762
$1,762
$1,762
$1,181
$1,181
$1,515
$1,674
$1,744
$1,868
Dwelling
Dwelling
Dwelling
Dwelling
Dwelling
Dwelling
Dwelling
1.00
0.67
0.67
0.86
0.95
0.99
1.06
$1,494
$1,494
$1,494
$1,494
$1,494
$1,494
$1,494
$1,494
$1,001
$1,001
$1,285
$1,419
$1,479
$1,584
Dwelling
Dwelling
Dwelling
Dwelling
Dwelling
Dwelling
Dwelling
1.00
0.67
0.67
0.86
0.95
0.99
1.06
$707
$707
$707
$707
$707
$707
$707
$707
$474
$474
$608
$672
$700
$749
Source: EDUs per unit from Table 2; net cost per EDU is cost per EDU from Table 7.
The updated park fees by unit size are compared to current fees in Table 9. In general, the updated
fees are higher for smaller units and lower for larger units. This reflects the fact that this study
found that larger units have fewer residents than was found in the 1996 study.
Without the new trail fee component, the total updated park fees would probably generate about the
same amount of revenue as the current fees, depending on the size mix of new units. With the trail
component, the total park and trail fee would be higher than the current park fee for all but the
largest units.
Capital Expansion Fee Study
City of Fort Collins, Colorado
8
duncan|associates
May 21, 2013
Parks
Table 9. Comparative Park Capital Expansion Fees
Land Use Type
Neighborhood Parks
Residential, up to 700 sq. ft.
Residential, 701-1,200 sq. ft.
Residential, 1,201-1,700 sq. ft.
Residential, 1,701-2,200 sq. ft.
Residential, over 2,200 sq. ft.
Community Parks
Residential, up to 700 sq. ft.
Residential, 701-1,200 sq. ft.
Residential, 1,201-1,700 sq. ft.
Residential, 1,701-2,200 sq. ft.
Residential, over 2,200 sq. ft.
Total Parks
Residential, up to 700 sq. ft.
Residential, 701-1,200 sq. ft.
Residential, 1,201-1,700 sq. ft.
Residential, 1,701-2,200 sq. ft.
Residential, over 2,200 sq. ft.
Trails
Residential, up to 700 sq. ft.
Residential, 701-1,200 sq. ft.
Residential, 1,201-1,700 sq. ft.
Residential, 1,701-2,200 sq. ft.
Residential, over 2,200 sq. ft.
Total Parks and Trails
Residential, up to 700 sq. ft.
Residential, 701-1,200 sq. ft.
Residential, 1,201-1,700 sq. ft.
Residential, 1,701-2,200 sq. ft.
Residential, over 2,200 sq. ft.
Current Fee
per Unit
Unit
Updated Fee
per Unit
Percent
Change
Dwelling
Dwelling
Dwelling
Dwelling
Dwelling
$937
$1,325
$1,559
$1,791
$2,181
$1,181
$1,515
$1,674
$1,744
$1,868
26%
14%
7%
-3%
-14%
Dwelling
Dwelling
Dwelling
Dwelling
Dwelling
$1,041
$1,477
$1,735
$1,996
$2,428
$1,001
$1,285
$1,419
$1,479
$1,584
-4%
-13%
-18%
-26%
-35%
Dwelling
Dwelling
Dwelling
Dwelling
Dwelling
$1,978
$2,802
$3,294
$3,787
$4,609
$2,182
$2,800
$3,093
$3,223
$3,452
10%
0%
-6%
-15%
-25%
Dwelling
Dwelling
Dwelling
Dwelling
Dwelling
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
$474
$608
$672
$700
$749
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
Dwelling
Dwelling
Dwelling
Dwelling
Dwelling
$1,978
$2,802
$3,294
$3,787
$4,609
$2,656
$3,408
$3,765
$3,923
$4,201
34%
22%
14%
4%
-9%
Source: Current fee from City of Fort Collins, Capital Improvement Expansion Fees, Effective January 2,
2012; updated fees from Table 8.
Capital Expansion Fee Study
City of Fort Collins, Colorado
9
duncan|associates
May 21, 2013
FIRE
Fire protection and rescue service is provided in Fort Collins by the Poudre Fire Authority pursuant
to an intergovernmental agreement. The fee is based on the fire stations and apparatus that are
located within the city limits, plus the City’s share of administrative and training facilities. The City
collects the fees from new development in the city limits and provides the funds to the Fire
Authority to be used for capacity-expanding improvements serving the city. This section calculates
updated fire capital expansion fees.
Service Units
The two most common methodologies used in calculating public safety (fire and police) service units
and impact fees are the “calls-for-service” approach and the “functional population” approach. The
1996 study used the functional population approach, and this update retains this methodology. This
approach is a generally-accepted methodology for both fire and police impact fee types, and is based
on the observation that demand for public safety facilities tends to be proportional to the presence
of people. This approach generates service unit multipliers that are similar to those based on call
data, but are more stable over time.3 The service unit is functional population. The description of
the functional population methodology, the calculation of the service unit multipliers and the
determination of existing fire and police service units are presented in Appendix B.
Cost per Service Unit
The cost per service unit to provide fire protection to new development is based on the current level
of service provided to existing development. The level of service is quantified as the ratio of the
replacement cost of existing fire capital facilities serving Fort Collins to existing fire service units in
Fort Collins, as summarized in Table 10. The fire stations included in calculating the level of service
for Fort Collins are limited to those stations located within the city limits. The portions of the
administration and training facilities service attributed to Fort Collins are based on the City’s share
of the Authority’s total annual call volume.
See Clancy Mullen, Fire and Police Demand Multipliers: Calls-for-Service versus Functional Population, proceedings of the
National Impact Fee Roundtable, Arlington, VA, October 5, 2006 http://growthandinfrastructure.org/proceedings/
2006_proceedings/fire%20police%20multipliers.pdf
3
Capital Expansion Fee Study
City of Fort Collins, Colorado
10
duncan|associates
May 21, 2013
Fire
Table 10. Existing Fire Stations
Facility
Fire Station #1
Fire Station #2
Fire Station #3
Fire Station #4
Fire Station #5
Fire Station #10
Fire Station #12
Fire Station #14
Administration (City share)
Training Center (City share)
Offices (City share)
Fire Tower (City share)
Burn Building (City share)
Total
Address
Peterson 505
S. Bryan 415
Mathews 2000
1945 W. Drake
Hogan 4615
Vermont 2067
E. Country Club Rd. 321
2109 Westchase Rd.
102 Remington
W. Vine 3400
W. Vine 3400
W. Vine 3400
W. Vine 3400
Acres
0.54
0.31
0.55
3.54
1.18
0.62
1.09
0.89
0.50
3.35
n/a
n/a
n/a
12.57
Building
Sq. Feet
8,516
4,376
6,500
15,380
8,773
9,830
9,800
10,800
8,375
10,888
10,134
3,152
9,256
115,780
Building
Cost
$1,672,835
$729,125
$688,295
$2,616,461
$1,431,268
$1,213,549
$1,308,246
$1,236,189
$1,553,855
$973,923
$727,153
$604,151
$382,263
$15,137,313
Source: Poudre Fire Authority, December 3-4, 2012 and February 12, 2012 (City share of administration and
training facility acres, square feet and building cost based on 83.75% of calls to locations within city limits in
2011).
The fire stations and equipment serving existing development in Fort Collins have a total estimated
replacement cost of $33 million, as summarized in Table 11. The Poudre Fire Authority issued debt
to finance its newest fire station in the city (Fire Station #4, which was completed in 2011) and is
using the capital expansion fees to retire the debt. The amount of the outstanding principal on the
debt represents capacity to serve future development, and this amount is excluded from the fee
calculation. Dividing the net cost of existing capital facilities and equipment (excluding the value of
the remaining debt on Fire Station 4) by the existing functional population results in a net cost of
$204 per service unit.
Table 11. Existing Fire Cost per Service Unit
Fire Facility Building Replacement Cost
Fire Facility Land Cost
Fire Vehicle Replacement Cost
Total Replacement Cost
– Debt on New Fire Station 4
Net Replacement Cost
÷ Existing Functional Population (24-Hour)
Net Cost per Functional Population
$15,137,313
$377,100
$17,607,388
$33,121,801
-$2,589,499
$30,532,302
149,740
$204
Source: Existing building cost from Table 10; land cost based on acres from
Table 10 and $30,000 cost per acre; vehicle replacement cost from Poudre
Fire Authority, December 5, 2012; outstanding debt principal from Poudre
Fire Authority, February 12, 2013; existing 24-hour functional populaiton from
Table 36.
Net Cost per Service Unit
Impact fees should be reduced in order to account for other types of revenues that will be generated
by new development and used to fund capacity-expanding improvements of the same type as those
to be funded by the impact fees. Cases in which such a credit is warranted include funding of
Capital Expansion Fee Study
City of Fort Collins, Colorado
11
duncan|associates
May 21, 2013
Fire
existing deficiencies and outstanding debt payments on existing facilities. While there is some debt
on existing facilities, as noted above, this debt has been excluded from the value of the facilities used
in determining the existing level of service, and the Poudre Fire Authority can continue to use the
updated capital expansion fees to retire the debt on Fire Station 4.
Potential Fees
The maximum fire capital expansion fees that may be adopted by the City based on this study are
determined by multiplying the number of service units generated by a unit of development by the
net cost per service unit. The resulting fee schedule is presented in Table 12. Two residential fee
options are shown: fees by housing type (single-family and multi-family) and fees by unit size.
Table 12. Potential Fire Capital Expansion Fees
Land Use Type
Single-Family Detached
Multi-Family
Residential, up to 700 sq. ft.
Residential, 701-1,200 sq. ft.
Residential, 1,201-1,700 sq. ft.
Residential, 1,701-2,200 sq. ft.
Residential, over 2,200 sq. ft.
Commercial
Industrial/Warehouse
Unit
Dwelling
Dwelling
Dwelling
Dwelling
Dwelling
Dwelling
Dwelling
1,000 sq. ft.
1,000 sq. ft.
Func. Pop. Net Cost/
per Unit Func. Pop.
1.85
$204
1.24
$204
1.25
$204
1.59
$204
1.76
$204
1.83
$204
1.96
$204
1.51
$204
0.36
$204
Net Cost/
Unit
$377
$253
$255
$324
$359
$373
$400
$308
$73
Source: Functional population per unit from Table 34 and Table 35 in Appendix B; net cost per
functional population from Table 11.
Table 13 compares the current fire fees with the updated fire fees (using the residential option of
fees by housing type). The updated fees increase more for residential than for nonresidential uses,
and more for smaller residential units than larger ones.
Table 13. Comparative Fire Fees
Land Use Type
Residential, up to 700 sq. ft.
Residential, 701-1,200 sq. ft.
Residential, 1,201-1,700 sq. ft.
Residential, 1,701-2,200 sq. ft.
Residential, over 2,200 sq. ft.
Commercial
Industrial/Warehouse
Unit
Dwelling
Dwelling
Dwelling
Dwelling
Dwelling
1,000 sq. ft.
1,000 sq. ft.
Current Fee
per Unit
$112
$160
$186
$215
$262
$229
$63
Updated Fee
per Unit
$255
$324
$359
$373
$400
$308
$73
Percent
Change
128%
103%
93%
73%
53%
34%
16%
Source: Current fees from City of Fort Collins, Ordinance No. 121, November 6, 2012; updated fees from
Table 12.
Capital Expansion Fee Study
City of Fort Collins, Colorado
12
duncan|associates
May 21, 2013
POLICE
The City provides police protection throughout the town. This section calculates updated police
capital expansion fees.
Service Units
The two most common methodologies used in calculating public safety (fire and police) service units
and impact fees are the “calls-for-service” approach and the “functional population” approach. The
1996 study used the functional population approach, and this update retains this methodology. This
approach is a generally-accepted methodology for both fire and police impact fee types, and is based
on the observation that demand for public safety facilities tends to be proportional to the presence
of people. This approach generates service unit multipliers that are similar to those based on call
data, but are more stable over time. The service unit is functional population. The description of
the functional population methodology, the calculation of the service unit multipliers and the
determination of existing fire and police service units are presented in Appendix B.
Cost per Service Unit
The cost per service unit to provide police protection to new development is based on the existing
level of service provided to existing development. The level of service is quantified as the ratio of
the replacement cost of existing police capital facilities to existing police service units.
The replacement cost of existing police vehicles is shown in Table 14.
Table 14. Existing Police Vehicles
Vehicle Type
Bearcat
Car
Mini-Bus
Motorcycle
Patrol Car
Patrol Pickup
Patrol SUV
Patrol Van
Pickup
Police Car
Police Van
SUV
Van
Total
Number
1
24
1
3
105
1
28
13
6
1
1
14
9
207
Unit Cost
$233,554
$22,000
$77,313
$20,841
$33,845
$75,845
$40,025
$32,950
$26,923
$18,967
$29,125
$37,727
$29,125
Total Cost
$233,554
$528,000
$77,313
$62,523
$3,553,725
$75,845
$1,120,700
$428,350
$161,538
$18,967
$29,125
$528,178
$262,125
$7,079,943
Source: City of Fort Collins, December 5, 2012.
The City’s recently-completed new police station was built with some excess capacity to serve future
growth. According to the City, approximately 25% of the building represents excess capacity.
Consequently, only 75% of the cost will be included in determining the current level of service (cost
per service unit) for existing development. Including vehicles and equipment, the portion of the
City’s existing police facilities serving existing development has a total estimated replacement cost of
Capital Expansion Fee Study
City of Fort Collins, Colorado
13
duncan|associates
May 21, 2013
Police
$34.7 million, as summarized in Table 15. Dividing the cost of existing capital facilities and
equipment serving existing development by existing service units results in a cost of $231 per
functional population.
Table 15. Existing Police Cost per Service Unit
Police Station Building Square Feet
Police Station Land Acres
Police Station Building/Land Value (75%)
Police Firing Range Value
Police Facility Contents Value
Police Vehicle Replacement Value
Total Police Facility/Equipment Value
÷ Existing Functional Population (24-Hour)
Police Cost per Functional Population
99,878
7.53
$20,294,687
$351,930
$6,937,981
$7,079,943
$34,664,541
149,740
$231
Source: Building square feet, acres and replacement values from City of
Fort Collins, December 5, 2012 (75% of police station deemed to serve
existing development); existing functional population from Table 36.
Net Cost per Service Unit
Impact fees should be reduced in order to account for other types of revenues that will be generated
by new development and used to fund capacity-expanding improvements of the same type as those
to be funded by the impact fees. Cases in which such an offset is warranted include funding of
existing deficiencies and outstanding debt payments on existing facilities. Since the updated fees are
based on the existing level of service, there are no existing deficiencies.
The City has some outstanding debt on the police station, as well as outstanding capital lease
payments on some vehicles. A relatively simple way to calculate a credit for outstanding debt is to
divide the debt by the number of existing service units. This places new development on an equal
footing with existing development in terms of the proportion of their costs that are funded through
debt. Since 25% of the new police station represents excess capacity available to serve, only 75% of
the debt is eligible for credit. The other 25% of the debt represents the cost of facilities that will
serve future development, and this portion of the debt service could be retired with police capital
expansion fees. As shown in Table 16, the police debt credit is $129 per functional population.
Table 16. Police Debt Credit
Outstanding Debt on Police Station (75%)
Outstanding Vehicle Capital Lease Payments
Total Police Facility Debt
÷ Existing Functional Population (24-Hour)
Police Debt Credit per Functional Population
$18,900,000
$453,578
$19,353,578
149,740
$129
Source: Outstanding debt and capital lease payments as of December 31,
2012 from City of Fort Collins, December 3, 2010; existing functional
population from Table 36 in Appendix B.
The credit for outstanding debt is subtracted from the cost per service unit to determine the net cost
per service unit (see Table 17 below).
Capital Expansion Fee Study
City of Fort Collins, Colorado
14
duncan|associates
May 21, 2013
Police
Table 17. Police Net Cost per Service Unit
Police Cost per Functional Population
– Police Debt Credit per Functional Population
Net Police Cost per Functional Population
$231
-$129
$102
Source: Cost per functional population from Table 15; debt credit from
Table 16
Potential Fees
The maximum police capital expansion fees that may be adopted by the City based on this study is
the product of the number of service units generated by a unit of development and the net cost per
service unit calculated above. The resulting fee schedule is presented in Table 18. Two residential
fees options are shown: fees by housing type (single-family and multi-family) and fees by unit size.
Table 18. Potential Police Capital Expansion Fees
Land Use Type
Single-Family Detached
Multi-Family
Residential, up to 700 sq. ft.
Residential, 701-1,200 sq. ft.
Residential, 1,201-1,700 sq. ft.
Residential, 1,701-2,200 sq. ft.
Residential, over 2,200 sq. ft.
Commercial
Industrial/Warehouse
Unit
Dwelling
Dwelling
Dwelling
Dwelling
Dwelling
Dwelling
Dwelling
1,000 sq. ft.
1,000 sq. ft.
Func. Pop. Net Cost/
per Unit Func. Pop.
1.85
$102
1.24
$102
1.25
$102
1.59
$102
1.76
$102
1.83
$102
1.96
$102
1.51
$102
0.36
$102
Net Cost/
Unit
$189
$126
$128
$162
$180
$187
$200
$154
$37
Source: Functional population per unit from Table 34 and Table 35 in Appendix B; net cost from Table
17.
Table 19 compares the current police fees with the updated fees (using the residential option of fees
by housing type). The updated fees are higher for residential uses and lower for nonresidential uses.
Table 19. Comparative Police Fees
Land Use Type
Residential, up to 700 sq. ft.
Residential, 701-1,200 sq. ft.
Residential, 1,201-1,700 sq. ft.
Residential, 1,701-2,200 sq. ft.
Residential, over 2,200 sq. ft.
Commercial
Industrial/Warehouse
Unit
Dwelling
Dwelling
Dwelling
Dwelling
Dwelling
1,000 sq. ft.
1,000 sq. ft.
Current Fee
per Unit
$75
$109
$129
$148
$180
$160
$44
Updated Fee
per Unit
$128
$162
$180
$187
$200
$154
$37
Percent
Change
71%
49%
40%
26%
11%
-4%
-16%
Source: Current fees from City of Fort Collins, Ordinance No. 121, November 6, 2012; updated fees from
Table 18.
Capital Expansion Fee Study
City of Fort Collins, Colorado
15
duncan|associates
May 21, 2013
GENERAL GOVERNMENT
The City provides a number of administrative facilities that will need to be expanded as the
community grows. To ensure that new development pays its fair share of the cost of these facilities,
the City charges a general government capital expansion fee. This section calculates updated general
government capital expansion fees.
Service Units
One of the most common methodologies used in calculating general government impact fees is the
“functional population” approach. This allocates the cost of growth to different types of new
development based on the presence of people at the site of the land use. The description of the
functional population methodology, the calculation of the service unit multipliers and the
determination of existing general government service units are presented in Appendix B.
Cost per Service Unit
The City’s existing general government facilities and replacement costs are summarized in Table 20.
Table 20. Existing General Government Facilities
Facility
City Hall
Main Administration Bldg.
City Office Building
OPS Service Facility
Streets Storage
Streets Office/Shop
Total
Address
300 Laporte Ave
281 N. College
215 N. Mason
625 Ninth St
625 Ninth St
Acres
2.00
0.75
2.00
2.50
3.24
8.48
18.97
Land
Value
$60,000
$22,500
$60,000
$75,000
$97,200
$254,400
$569,100
Building
Sq. Feet
31,553
37,603
71,500
26,564
48,400
14,287
229,907
Building
Cost
$8,968,435
$6,689,347
$12,731,810
$5,647,145
$4,125,256
$763,936
$38,925,929
Source: City of Fort Collins, January 4, 2013 (land value based on $30,000 per acre).
The existing level of service (cost per service unit) is determined by dividing the replacement cost of
existing facilities by the existing service units being served by those facilities. As shown in Table 21,
the cost per service unit for general government facilities is $328 per functional population.
Table 21. General Government Cost per Service Unit
Building Replacement Value
Land Value
Vehicle/Equipment Value
Total Replacement Cost
÷ Existing Functional Population (16-Hour)
Cost per Functional Population
$38,925,929
$569,100
$9,753,022
$49,248,051
150,354
$328
Source: Building and land replacement costs from Table 20; vehicleequipment value is sum of original costs from City fixed asset listings,
January 2, 2013; existing functional population from Table 36 in Appendix B.
Capital Expansion Fee Study
City of Fort Collins, Colorado
16
duncan|associates
May 21, 2013
General Government
Net Cost per Service Unit
Impact fees should be reduced in order to account for other types of revenues that will be generated
by new development and used to fund capacity-expanding improvements of the same type as those
to be funded by the impact fees. Cases in which such an offset is warranted include funding of
existing deficiencies and outstanding debt payments on existing facilities. Since the updated fees are
based on the existing level of service, there are no existing deficiencies.
The City has some outstanding debt on the main administration building. A relatively simple way to
calculate a credit for outstanding debt is to divide the debt by the number of existing service units.
This places new development on an equal footing with existing development in terms of the
proportion of their costs that are funded through debt. As shown in Table 22, the police debt credit
is $5 per functional population.
Table 22. General Government Debt Credit
Outstanding Debt on Main Administration Bldg.
÷ Existing Functional Population (16-Hour)
Cost per Functional Population
$745,745
150,354
$5
Source: Outstanding debt from City of Fort Collins, December 3, 2010;
existing functional population from Table 36 in Appendix B.
The credit for outstanding debt is subtracted from the cost per service unit to determine the net cost
per service unit, as shown in Table 23.
Table 23. General Government Net Cost per Service Unit
Cost per Functional Population
– Debt Credit per Functional Population
Net Cost per Functional Population
$328
-$5
$323
Source: Cost per functional population from Table 15; debt credit from
Table 16
Potential Fees
The maximum general government capital expansion fees that may be adopted by the City based on
this study is the product of the number of service units generated by a unit of development and the
net cost per service unit calculated above. The resulting fee schedule is presented in Table 24. Two
residential fee options are shown: fees by housing type (single-family and multi-family) and fees by
unit size.
Capital Expansion Fee Study
City of Fort Collins, Colorado
17
duncan|associates
May 21, 2013
General Government
Table 24. Potential General Government Capital Expansion Fees
Land Use Type
Single-Family Detached
Multi-Family
Residential, up to 700 sq. ft.
Residential, 701-1,200 sq. ft.
Residential, 1,201-1,700 sq. ft.
Residential, 1,701-2,200 sq. ft.
Residential, over 2,200 sq. ft.
Commercial
Industrial/Warehouse
Unit
Dwelling
Dwelling
Dwelling
Dwelling
Dwelling
Dwelling
Dwelling
1,000 sq. ft.
1,000 sq. ft.
Func. Pop. Net Cost/
per Unit Func. Pop.
1.38
$323
0.93
$323
0.93
$323
1.19
$323
1.31
$323
1.37
$323
1.47
$323
2.26
$323
0.53
$323
Net Cost/
Unit
$446
$300
$300
$384
$423
$443
$475
$730
$171
Source: Functional population per unit from Table 34 and Table 35 in Appendix B; net cost per
functional population from Table 23.
Table 25 compares the current general government capital expansion fees with the updated fees
(using the residential fee options of fees by unit size). The updated fees increase more for
nonresidential than for residential uses, and more for smaller residential units than larger ones.
Table 25. Comparative General Government Fees
Land Use Type
Residential, up to 700 sq. ft.
Residential, 701-1,200 sq. ft.
Residential, 1,201-1,700 sq. ft.
Residential, 1,701-2,200 sq. ft.
Residential, over 2,200 sq. ft.
Commercial
Industrial/Warehouse
Unit
Dwelling
Dwelling
Dwelling
Dwelling
Dwelling
1,000 sq. ft.
1,000 sq. ft.
Current Fee
per Unit
$142
$201
$235
$272
$330
$257
$71
Updated Fee
per Unit
$300
$384
$423
$443
$475
$730
$171
Percent
Change
111%
91%
80%
63%
44%
184%
141%
Source: Current fees from City of Fort Collins, Ordinance No. 121, November 6, 2012; updated fees from
Table 24.
Capital Expansion Fee Study
City of Fort Collins, Colorado
18
duncan|associates
May 21, 2013
APPENDIX A: DEMOGRAPHIC DATA
Average Household Size by Housing Types
A key input into impact fee analysis is the average number of people residing in different types of
dwelling units. This statistic, known as average household size, is the ratio of household population
to households (which is the same as occupied dwelling units).
The most reliable data on average household size comes from the decennial census counts.
However, these 100%-count data are only available for all housing units, with no distinction by
housing type. Overall, the trend between the 2000 and 2010 census was one of a slight decline in
overall average household size, as can be seen in Table 26.
Table 26. Average Household Size, 2000 and 2010
Housing Type
All Housing Types, 2000
All Housing Types, 2010
Total
Units
47,755
60,503
Occupied
Units
45,882
57,829
Household
Population
112,597
136,901
Average
HH Size
2.45
2.37
Source: 2000 and 2010 US Census for Fort Collins, CO, SF1 (100% counts).
The 2000 census provided data on average household size by housing type for a 1-in-6 sample
(about 17%). Those data are shown in Table 27.
Table 27. Average Household Size by Housing Type, 2000
Housing Type
Single-Family Detached
Single-Family Attached
Multi-Family
Mobile Home
RV/Other
Total
Multi-Family/SF Attached
Total
Units
26,706
3,613
16,163
1,267
17
47,766
19,776
Occupied
Units
25,941
3,464
15,190
1,216
17
45,828
18,654
Household
Population
73,943
7,031
28,522
2,840
40
112,376
35,553
Average
HH Size
2.85
2.03
1.88
2.34
2.35
2.45
1.91
Source: 2000 US Census for Fort Collins, CO, SF-3 data (1-in-6 sample)
Unfortunately, the Census Bureau has discontinued providing robust sample data as part of the
decennial census, and instead conducts annual data from 1% samples, which has been aggregated
into a 5% sample for the 2006-2010 period. These data are based on a much smaller sample than the
2010 census, and also collapse single-family detached and attached housing into the same category.
They are shown in Table 28.
Capital Expansion Fee Study
City of Fort Collins, Colorado
19
duncan|associates
May 21, 2013
Appendix A: Demographic Data
Table 28. Average Household Size by Housing Type, 2006-2010
Housing Type
Single-Family, Det./Att.
Multi-Family
Mobile Home
Other
Total
Total
Units
38,434
19,441
1,414
13
59,302
Occupied
Units
36,779
17,747
1,350
13
55,889
Household
Population
96,923
31,168
3,383
21
131,495
Average
HH Size
2.64
1.76
2.51
1.62
2.35
Source: US Census Bureau, 2006-2010 American Community Survey data (5%
sample), Fort Collins, CO.
Comparing the data from 2000 and 2006-2010, it is clear that the decline in average household size is
not due to a change in the mix of housing, but rather to a more general decline in household size
among all housing types. While mobile home units show an increase, the sample sizes are too small
for this housing type for the results to be reliable.
Table 29. Change in Average Household Size, 2000-2010
Average HH Size
2000
2006-10
2.75
2.64
1.88
1.76
2.34
2.51
2.45
2.35
Housing Type
Single-Family, Detached/Attached
Multi-Family
Mobile Home
Total
Percent
Change
-4.00%
-6.38%
7.26%
-4.08%
Source: Table 27 and Table 28.
An estimate of current average household size by housing type starts with the data from the 2000
census, since these numbers are based on the most robust sample. The average household sizes
from the 2000 census are adjusted downward for all housing types by the overall decline, as shown
in Table 30.
Table 30. Current Average Household Size by Housing Type
Housing Type
Single-Family Detached/MH
Multi-Family/SF Attached
Total
Avg. HH Size
2000 Census
2.85
1.91
2.45
Ratio of
2010/2000
Avg. HH Size
0.9673
0.9673
0.9673
Current
Avg. HH Size
2.76
1.85
2.37
Source: 2000 average household size from Table 27; ratio derived from Table 26.
Average Household Size by Unit Size
In the 1996 study, average household size by dwelling unit size was estimated using census micro
data for Larimer County to determine average household size by bedrooms, and City building permit
data to determine average dwelling unit size by bedrooms using linear regression analysis. The two
results were combined to estimate average household size by dwelling unit size.
While the approach used in the original study has the advantage of relying solely on local (city and
county level) data, its weakness is that it is indirect – neither the census data nor the building permit
data contain information on both the number of persons in the unit and the size of the unit.
Capital Expansion Fee Study
City of Fort Collins, Colorado
20
duncan|associates
May 21, 2013
Appendix A: Demographic Data
Consequently, the 1996 analysis had to utilize an intervening variable of the number of bedrooms in
the unit.
A simpler and more direct approach is to utilize national data from the American Housing Survey,
sponsored by the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development and conducted by the U.S.
Census Bureau. The most recent survey was done in 2011. This survey provides data on the
number of residents and the square footage of a sample of individual housing units. The data from
the Western Census Region, which includes Colorado, was used. Average household sizes by
dwelling unit size from the western U.S. were converted to Equivalent Dwelling Units (EDUs), with
one EDU representing the average number of persons residing in an occupied single-family
detached unit. These EDU multipliers were then multiplied by the average household size of a
single-family unit in Fort Collins to estimate local average household sizes by dwelling unit size, as
summarized in Table 31.
Table 31. Average Household Size by Dwelling Unit Size, Western U.S., 2011
Housing Type/Size
0-700 sf
701-1,200 sf
1,201-1,700 sf
1,701-2,200 sf
2,200 sf +
All Units
All Single-Family Det.
Sample
4,726
11,845
8,570
6,218
7,686
39,045
23,453
American Housing Survey, 2011
HouseAvg.
HH Pop.
Holds
HH Size
3,943,814
2,046,482
1.93
13,908,874
5,631,663
2.47
11,753,334
4,320,515
2.72
8,824,060
3,112,727
2.83
11,545,664
3,793,080
3.04
49,975,747
18,904,467
2.64
34,517,546
12,053,378
2.86
Ft. Collins
Avg. HH
Size
1.86
2.38
2.62
2.73
2.93
n/a
2.76
EDUs/
Unit
0.675
0.864
0.951
0.990
1.063
0.923
1.000
Source: U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development, American Housing Survey, 2011, Western Census
Region; Fort Collins average household size by unit size based on average household size for a single-family
detached unit in Fort Collins from Table 30 and EDUs/unit from the American Housing Survey.
The updated average household sizes confirm the tendency of larger units to have more residents,
but the difference between the smallest and largest units is less pronounced than it was found to be
in the 1996 analysis, as illustrated in Figure 1.
Figure 1. Average Household Size by Unit Size, 1996 and 2012
Capital Expansion Fee Study
City of Fort Collins, Colorado
21
duncan|associates
May 21, 2013
Appendix A: Demographic Data
Existing Housing Units by Type
The mix of housing units by type in Fort Collins has not changed significantly over the last decade,
as shown in Table 32. Because of its larger sample size, the housing shares from the 2000 census
will be used.
Table 32. Dwelling Units by Housing Type, Fort Collins, 2000-2010
Housing Type
Single-Family Detached
Single-Family Attached
Multi-Family
Mobile Home
RV/Other
Total
Single-Family Det./Mobile Home
Total Units
2000 2006-10
26,706
33,525
3,613
4,909
16,163
19,441
1,267
1,414
17
13
47,766
59,302
27,973
34,939
% of Total Units
2000 2006-10
55.9%
56.5%
7.6%
8.3%
33.8%
32.8%
2.7%
2.4%
0.0%
0.0%
100.0%
100.0%
58.6%
58.9%
Source: 2000 data from 2000 US Census, SF3 (1-in-6 sample); 2006-2010 data from US
Census, American Community Survey (5% sample).
The current number of dwelling units in Fort Collins by housing type is estimated based on the total
number of units enumerated in the 2000 census, the share of units by housing type from the 2000
census, and the number of building permits issued over the last two years, as shown in Table 33.
Table 33. Dwelling Units by Housing Type, Fort Collins, 2012
Housing Type
Single-Family Detached/MH
Multi-Family/SF Attached
Total
Housing
Share
58.6%
41.4%
100.0%
Est. 2010
Units
35,432
25,071
60,503
2010-2011
Permits
406
775
1,181
Est. 2012
Units
35,838
25,846
61,684
Source: Housing share based on 2000 Census from Table 32; 2010 total units from 2000 Census (Table
26), 2010 units by housing type based on housing share; 2010-2011 permits are number of permits
issued by City in 2010 and 2011 calendar years from City of Fort Collins, December 3, 2012.
Capital Expansion Fee Study
City of Fort Collins, Colorado
22
duncan|associates
May 21, 2013
APPENDIX B: FUNCTIONAL POPULATION
A common methodology used in calculating public safety (fire and police) and general government
service units and impact fees is the “functional population” approach. This approach is a generallyaccepted methodology for these impact fee types and is based on the observation that demand for
public safety and general government facilities tends to be proportional to the presence of people at
a particular site.
Functional population is analogous to the concept of “full-time equivalent” employees. It
represents the number of “full-time equivalent” people present at the site of a land use, and it is
used for the purpose of determining the impact of a particular development on the need for
facilities. For residential development, functional population is simply average household size times
the percent of time people spend at home. For nonresidential development, functional population
is based on a formula that factors trip generation rates, average vehicle occupancy and average
number of hours spent by visitors at a land use.
Two types of functional population are used in impact fee analysis: “24-hour” functional population
and “daytime” functional population. 24-hour functional population is most appropriate for
services, like fire and police protection, that operate on a 24-hour per day basis. Daytime functional
population is more appropriate for general government facilities, which do not operate around the
clock.
Residential Functional Population
For residential land uses, the impact of a dwelling unit on the need for capital facilities is generally
proportional to the number of persons residing in the dwelling unit. This can be measured for
different housing types in terms of either average household size (average number of persons per
occupied dwelling unit) or persons per unit (average number of persons per dwelling unit, including
vacant as well as occupied units). In this analysis, average household size is used to develop the
functional population multipliers, as it avoids the need to make assumptions about occupancy rates.
Determining residential functional population multipliers is considerably simpler than the
nonresidential component. It is estimated that people, on average, spend 16 hours, or 67 percent, of
each 24-hour weekday at their place of residence and the other 33 percent away from home. For
daytime functional population, a 16-hour day is used, and it is estimated that people spend half of
the 16-hour day at home. The functional population per unit for residential uses is shown in Table
34.
Capital Expansion Fee Study
City of Fort Collins, Colorado
23
duncan|associates
May 21, 2013
Appendix B: Functional Population
Table 34. Functional Population per Unit for Residential Uses
Housing Type
Single-Family Detached
Multi-Family
Residential, up to 700 sq. ft.
Residential, 701-1,200 sq. ft.
Residential, 1,201-1,700 sq. ft.
Residential, 1,701-2,200 sq. ft.
Residential, over 2,200 sq. ft.
Unit
Dwelling
Dwelling
Dwelling
Dwelling
Dwelling
Dwelling
Dwelling
Average
HH Size
2.76
1.85
1.86
2.38
2.62
2.73
2.93
Occupancy
Func. Pop. Per Unit
24-Hour Daytime 24-Hour Daytime
0.67
0.50
1.85
1.38
0.67
0.50
1.24
0.93
0.67
0.50
1.25
0.93
0.67
0.50
1.59
1.19
0.67
0.50
1.76
1.31
0.67
0.50
1.83
1.37
0.67
0.50
1.96
1.47
Source: Average household size from Table 30 (housing type) and Table 31 (unit size).
Nonresidential Functional Population
The functional population methodology for nonresidential land uses is based on trip generation and
employee density data. Functional population per 1,000 square feet is derived by dividing the total
number of hours spent by employees and visitors during a week day by 24 hours (16 hours for
daytime functional population). Employees are estimated to spend 8 hours per day at their place of
employment, and visitors are estimated to spend one hour per visit. The formulas used to derive the
nonresidential functional population estimates are summarized in Figure 2.
Figure 2. Nonresidential Functional Population Formulas
24-HR FUNCPOP/UNIT =
(employee hours/1000 sf + visitor hours/1000 sf) ÷ 24 hours/day
Where:
Employee hours/1000 sf
=
employees/1000 sf x 8 hours/day
Visitor hours/1000 sf
=
visitors/1000 sf x 1 hour/visit
Visitors/1000 sf
=
weekday ADT/1000 sf x avg. vehicle occupancy – employees/1000 sf
Weekday ADT/1000 sf
=
one-way avg. daily trips (total trip ends ÷ 2)
DAILY FUNCPOP/UNIT =
(employee hours/1000 sf + visitor hours/1000 sf) ÷ 16 hours/day
Where:
Employee hours/1000 sf
=
employees/1000 sf x 8 hours/day
Visitor hours/1000 sf
=
visitors/1000 sf x 1 hour/visit
Visitors/1000 sf
=
weekday ADT/1000 sf x avg. vehicle occupancy – employees/1000 sf
Weekday ADT/1000 sf
=
one-way avg. daily trips (total trip ends ÷ 2)
Capital Expansion Fee Study
City of Fort Collins, Colorado
24
duncan|associates
May 21, 2013
Appendix B: Functional Population
Using this formula and information on trip generation rates, vehicle occupancy rates from the
National Household Travel Survey and other sources and assumptions, nonresidential functional
population estimates per 1,000 square feet of gross floor area are calculated in Table 35.
Table 35. Functional Population per Unit for Nonresidential Uses
Land Use
Retail
Office
Industrial
Warehouse
Unit
1,000 sq. ft.
1,000 sq. ft.
1,000 sq. ft.
1,000 sq. ft.
Trip
Rate
21.47
5.51
3.48
1.78
Persons/ Employee/ Visitors/ Func. Pop. Per Unit
Trip
Unit
Unit
24-Hour
Daytime
1.96
1.02
41.06
2.05
3.08
1.24
2.31
4.52
0.96
1.44
1.24
1.05
3.27
0.49
0.73
1.24
0.43
1.78
0.22
0.33
Source: Trip rates based on one-half of average daily trip rate from ITE, Trip Generation, 8th ed., 2008 (retail based
on shopping center, office based on general office, industrial based on light industrial); persons/trip is average
vehicle occupancy from Federal Highway Administration, Nationwide Household Travel Survey, 2009;
employees/unit from U.S. Department of Energy, Commercial Buildings Energy Consumption Survey, 2003;
visitors/unit is trips times persons/trip minus employees/unit; functional population/unit calculated based on
formula from Figure 2.
Total Functional Population
The total functional population of Fort Collins is determined by multiplying the number of existing
units of development by the functional population per unit, as shown in Table 36.
Table 36. Existing Functional Population
Land Use
Single-Family Detached
Multi-Family
Commercial/Institutional
Industrial/Warehouse
Total Functional Population
Unit
Dwelling
Dwelling
1,000 sq. ft.
1,000 sq. ft.
Existing
Units
35,838
25,846
32,533
6,295
Func. Pop./Unit
24-Hour Daytime
1.85
1.38
1.24
0.93
1.51
2.26
0.36
0.53
Functional Pop.
24-Hour Daytime
66,300
49,456
32,049
24,037
49,125
73,525
2,266
3,336
149,740 150,354
Source: Existing dwelling units from Table 33; existing nonresidential building square footage from Larimer
County Assessor’s Office, December 4, 2012; functional population per unit from Table 34 and Table 35
(commercial/institutional is average of retail and office; industrial/warehouse is average of industrial and
warehouse).
Capital Expansion Fee Study
City of Fort Collins, Colorado
25
duncan|associates
May 21, 2013