Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutNatural Resources Advisory Board - Minutes - 04/20/2022 NATURAL RESOURCES ADVISORY BOARD TYPE OF MEETING – REGULAR April 20, 2022 6:00 – 8:00 pm Via Zoom 04/20/2022 – MINUTES Page 1 CALL TO ORDER 6:02 pm ROLL CALL • List of Board Members Present – − Barry Noon − Dawson Metcalf - Chair − Drew Derderian − Hillary Mizia − Victoria McKennan − Kevin Krause- Vice Chair − Avneesh Kumar • List of Board Members Absent – Excused or Unexcused, if no contact with Chair has been made − Danielle Buttke • List of Staff Members Present − Honore Depew, Staff Liaison − Dean Klingner − Sylvia Tatman-Burruss − Mariel Miller − Eric Potyondy − Marcus Coldiron • List of Guests − none 1. AGENDA REVIEW a. No changes to agenda 2. PUBLIC PARTICIPATION - none 3. APPROVAL OF MINUTES – MARCH a. Hillary moved and Drew seconded a motion to approve the February minutes with no NATURAL RESOURCES ADVISORY BOARD TYPE OF MEETING – REGULAR 0 4 /20/2022 – MINUTES Page 2 changes. Motion passed unanimously. 5-0 4. NEW BUSINESS a. Regional Transportation Update – Dean Klingner, Deputy Director of Planning Development, and transportation (PDT), shared how Larimer County is gathering input from local communities to help direct next steps for a regional transportation solution. A May 24th Council work session is planned for this topic (Discussion). − Discussion | Q + A − Dawson – Q – In regard to the 50% leaving Fort Collins for work, how are we thinking about this in context to this regional plan? Is 50% going to Loveland? Dean – A – Loveland is the biggest one with Greeley, Boulder, and Longmont. Maybe half of the 50% is going to Loveland. Generally thinking, jobs and housing balance is one of the big strategies the City has. If you have a household with multiple working partners, you are usually trying to decide where to live and often end up in the middle, or one person commuting regardless of your job/housing balance. Those things are driving it and as a region grows, there are more options to work regionally so people are taking advantage of that. There is no easy answer. There are lots of dynamics we don’t control. − Victoria – Q – In these conversations has the focus been primarily about projects or is there conversations about the connects between land use and transportation? Dean – A – I would say the most straight forward conversation is the mix of projects. The perspective that Fort Collins brings is how to bring multi-moto options to the region and connect them in that way. I have talked about how land use connection must be part of the solution. As a City employee one of the things we hear is the cost of housing in Fort Collins is one of the drivers. Personally, I would caveat not just cost, but choice around type of housing that you want. We haven’t had large lots for a long time. That is certain draw in Timnath and Windsor. Land use is a driving part of the problem, and it multiplies the complexity of collaboration around agreeing on transportation solution. We also have a regional consistency around land use too because all communities are at all different levels of their growth journeys. − Victoria – Q – Has there been conversations about where Larimer County projects might fit into the Statewide Transportation Plan or is that down the road? Dean – A – There is a lot of projects regionally that are on the statewide transportation plan that are eligible for at least partial funding through the state or local MPO. In the 2019 proposal there was a small portion of the funding that was going towards a local contribution to, for NATURAL RESOURCES ADVISORY BOARD TYPE OF MEETING – REGULAR 0 4 /20/2022 – MINUTES Page 3 example I-25. I-25 checks all the boxes and to every community is important. There are some projects not on the state highway or not important regional connections that are not on the statewide plan. − Kevin– Q – In regard to the focus groups and everyone agreeing that transportation is an issue that needs to be solved, do you have any more idea on what that “solved” means to people? Dean – A – The short answer is no but the theme coming out of them was that if you have lived in Fort Collins for some time, you have seen a trajectory around transportation for things like congestion, safety, or liability. In general, the biggest threat that ties the region together is I-25. I think it trickles down and depends on what part of town you live in. If you are not the 50% that leaves town, you might not see this daily. If you are coming in or out of town on Harmony, Prospect, Mulberry, or 392 you can expect significant congestion that has worsened over time. There is a general perception that transportation infrastructure has not kept up with the speed of growth. That would be what I have heard people with a typical option around transportation. We have also received significant feedback that our city transportation system could be more frequent, could go more places, and have more protected bike lanes. − Kevin – Q – Are they laser focused on their one issue or are they open to ecologically minded solutions? Dean – A – I will say that was a significant perspective that Fort Collins brought in 2018-2019 to try to get that slice of the pie to be bigger for transit and that was relatively successful. The City of Fort Collins is integral in starting a bunch of regional routes to places like Greeley and Boulder as well as being a stop for Bustang. EMP is looking at the following regional transit routes: Windsor to Loveland, Greeley to Loveland, and Fort Collins to Greeley. The less and less dense a community, the less transit will be a solution. The routes can’t generate enough ridership or get close enough to people. Fort Collins is built in a way that is a challenge from a density point of view to have transit work. Communities like Timnath and Windsor are not opposed to transportation but know it won’t make much of a dent. Dawson – Q – What boards do you see might be associated with this here in Fort Collins and what are the potential avenues you see the Board playing a positive impact in some of this going forward? Dean – A – I would say it depends on what you think; that is your role as a board. It is great for us to know how the community is reacting to this and I would go back from my point of view is it is easy to say yes that Fort Collins wants to be a partner for regional transportation solutions. That is easy and then it gets hard on what it looks like and how we support it. Some of the questions you asked could lead NATURAL RESOURCES ADVISORY BOARD TYPE OF MEETING – REGULAR 0 4 /20/2022 – MINUTES Page 4 to great feedback to is there a land use code that is part of this and how much transit is a factor. I didn’t mention the regional trail projects like the power trail that connects Loveland by going under Harmony. The two questions are, should Fort Collins be an active partner, what does it look like for Fort Collins to be a full supporter, and where does the revenue come from. Feedback can be provided to Dean or Council as they are thinking about it. − Victoria – Q – Have committees like Red Feather Lakes Planning or Committees in Laporte have similar presentations? Dean – A – I don’t know as there is a large category of unincorporated Larimer county. I am not sure how the county is handling communication around this to them. I would say that for some of the communities there might be a project that is important to them, but in general there wouldn’t be much change for folks that are further out. b. East Mulberry Area Potential Annexation Phasing Scenarios – Sylvia Tatman- Burruss, policy and Project Manager, reviewed potential annexation phasing scenarios for the East Mulberry enclave and gathered feedback regarding next steps and further scenario refinement. An April 26 Council work session is planned for this topic. (Discussion) − Discussion | Q + A − Dawson – Q –In regard to area five that already had housing partially annexed, how did that come to be? Sylvia – A – That was kind of a complex situation. Sometimes we have annexation occur through enclaves where it is surrounded by city land. Some occur through development proposals, like this one. This area was originally called Green Fields Land; it is a big area that is planned in phases or development. That whole area was brough into the City in the last couple of years. There are 1600 units of housing proposed so that will change that area of town no matter what. It could create a lot of new road infrastructure, broadband, and electric utilities for that area. − Dawson – Q – Because of that potential growth in their plans, do you think that would play a significant role in how Council could process this as there will be an increase of growth in potential new voters and people coming into that space? Sylvia – A – That is an interesting question as that area builds out. As a large development those folks could start say that they feel isolated out there because they don’t have the connectivity, parks, etc. that the rest of the City has. It could change the conversation I think Council priorities do change and shift depending on what the community is interested in. There is also the NATURAL RESOURCES ADVISORY BOARD TYPE OF MEETING – REGULAR 0 4 /20/2022 – MINUTES Page 5 Montava development planned to the North. That could bring infrastructure and additional traffic which could lead to a conversation around infrastructure that Larimer County, as a rural service provider isn’t in the business of providing. That could also change the conversation. − Victoria – Q – As a planner for Larimer County, I am thinking about development that could maybe get approved through Larimer County and that feels like a missed opportunity. I am wondering as you are going through his plan, is there any opportunity, while it is in-between phase of annexation to empower or equip planners to have a review criteria for this section of land that is kind of in the in-between? Is there anyway to include some more language around buffering for natural resources? Sylvia – A – I think for right now we have the 2002 existing area plan that is jointly adopted between City and County. It is out of date. The City and County have goth updated land use codes since then. I am hopeful that even if annexation doesn’t move forward right now, that perhaps we can still update the plan. I think the City has been working with a very willing County staff and there is a lot of opportunity to partner and continue some really good work. I think we can continue to work better once we have some direction. If Council says no, then City and County can shift a little bit in approach to a partnership so that can be structure a little differently. − Victoria – Q Regarding new development triggering annexation, is the idea that development might not be happening because there might be more development opportunities if areas were already annexed with the City. Sylvia – A – I think that is one of those things about modeling, is that you can put assumptions in there and it may or may not come into fruition. The Green Field is occurring, and they went through annexation anyway, so that is a little up in the air. In some ways there may be a draw for undergrounded utilities and broadband internet, but there may not be a lot of others. It is in proximity to the City of Fort Collins already so is that already attractive enough to developers? I think maybe that is a strong case and maybe it’s not. In the model it is assumed it could help but not a huge deterrent to develop in or around Fort Collins. − Dawson – Q – It looks like the model included the wetland area by I-25, I am not familiar with that space. Do you happen to know the state of it from the County’s perspective on how it is currently being managed? Sylvia – A – Right now there is a lot of significance to it that is year-round open, running, and warm area that serves songbirds later into the year then other areas. It is not terribly well managed. There is more cattail activity then desired. The City did purchase a portion of area to start to look at preservation of the Cooper NATURAL RESOURCES ADVISORY BOARD TYPE OF MEETING – REGULAR 0 4 /20/2022 – MINUTES Page 6 Slough, but that work is also slow and looking out long-term. I think there is an interest from the City side for preservation and buffering that area to at least keep it as it is. There are conversations with Green Fields development to be a great management with storm water mitigation. There is different work happening in different places and through annexation could be better buffering and more resources. The County has tried to push for great buffers, but it hasn’t been solidified as much in land use code as the City as it is just different in municipalities. − Barry – Q – In these annexation plans, what sort of constrains can the City impose on allowable developments? Sylvia – A – Buffers from natural features that exist in the area is one. It is not a knock on the County, just a difference of jurisdiction control and their place on rural control. The City master plan document is focused on increasing density and preserving some natural and park areas. I would assume there would be great density along East Mulberry and more residential development. This area is already mostly developed. New development would occur in those areas that don’t have a lot of development. Different standards for storm water mitigation, urban tree standards, LID standards, water treatment, sign code, and esthetics. Barry – So my perspective is that given it is currently mostly developed the undeveloped plan greatly appreciates in its value for the provision of environmental goods and services. The term undeveloped land often makes me cringe because it is interpreted by so many as a lost opportunity to increase the quantity of human life, which is different than quality. I think the thing to recognize is the corridor is a horrible introduction to the City of Fort Collins. It has already been so environmentally disrupted that the remaining undeveloped area is greatly appreciated in its value not for development but for protection. I am wondering if the City, County, or both is/are looking at long term affects of covering the entire corridor with impervious surfaces. Those aren’t just he obvious asphalt and cement, but the footprints of all buildings so areas that used to support vegetation, support wildlife, capture perceptions, restore ground water supplies, and purify water to run off to the river are highly compromised. Are those discussions happening in your group? Sylvia – I think there is a lot in that that is important. We talked a lot with the storm water team about his area. Back in the 50s and 60s this area was inexpensive due to its flooding, which we still deal with today. Development that creates that impervious surface creates difficulty in runoff and more issues in runoff to the Poudre River and Cooper Slough. We are trying to be thoughtful in this area about development that could occur to look at not creating more issues than there already. The City already purchased one piece of land to preserve the Cooper Slough. There are other parcels we are interested in purchasing, but we must have a willing seller. We are trying NATURAL RESOURCES ADVISORY BOARD TYPE OF MEETING – REGULAR 0 4 /20/2022 – MINUTES Page 7 to be thoughtful about new development and how we can mitigate those impacts in an area that has been used for industrial development and has disrupted some of those natural features. c. Graywater Ordinance – Considered board action to advise Council on a new local graywater ordinance as required by the State to enable installations of graywater system. April 11, 2022 memo to NRAB requesting a recommendation to the City Council on this policy direction provided by Mariel Miller, Water Conservationist Specialist. City Council will consider a Graywater Ordinance at its August 16th regular meeting. (Action). − Dawson – Q – Thinking about the timeline in August, in context to development plans that are happening, is there any hope that these could have impact on some larger future development plans? Mariel – A – There is hope for that, but I have not heard of any developers being interested in graywater to date. Marcus – I have not heard any interested developers in graywater. This could have to do with the newness of it and maybe they don’t know it is an option in the City of Fort Collins. − Dawson – Q – Are there any plans for engagement around development for this process? Mariel – A – Yes there is an extensive newsletter with over 1000 builders and contractors who we have messaged. We are targeting that group for the informational stakeholders meeting we are holding in June. We will continue to do more messaging as well. − Barry – Q – In order to separate the various sources/streams of water use what is the infrastructure requirements in term of plumbing for an individual household that would separate graywater from water that would be used to flush your toilet? Mariel – A – A potable back up system and dual plumbing would be required. So, you are not only having a freshwater line with potable drinking water coming to the toilet, but you would also have the graywater line to each source. You would also have the 50-gallon storage tank and the certified treatment system. − Barry – Q – So this would be something that would occur at an individual residence or business? Mariel – A – Correct. − Barry – Q – So who bares the cost of doing that? Mariel – A – We don’t have any funding mechanisms identified that the City would provide or any rebate/incentive, so the cost would be barred by the developer or whoever is responsible for paying for the development of the property. NATURAL RESOURCES ADVISORY BOARD TYPE OF MEETING – REGULAR 0 4 /20/2022 – MINUTES Page 8 − Barry – Q – Most developer would pass this cost on to the consumer, correct? Mariel – A – I would assume so. − Barry – Q – That seems like a huge barrier, who owns graywater? Eric – A – All of the water in the state is owned by the state in an abstract legal sense. It is owned by the state the entire time and people acquire rights to use that water which are called water rights. During the time that the city diverts water out of Horsetooth Reservoir it is under our control. We control it and can use it under our water rights, but it is owned by the state in an abstract state but while it is diverted in our system and running through out treated delivery pipes, through hoses, and back it is under our Fort Collins utilities’ purview. Barry – That is counter to my understanding of individuals own water rights. Eric – Yes, they own water rights. The water right is an abstract legal right to use the water the State owns in a more abstract sense. Barry – As an ecologist, I have been dealing with issues of keeping water in rivers for some time and that is counter to my understanding. If the City wanted to increase flows in the Poudre that requires them to purchase right, they simply cannot say you need to leave more water. Eric – We are saying the same thing. I heard the question as who owns the water. I am making a distinction between owning the physical thing that is water and the legal right to use the water. That is a distinction the law draws. Barry – Can you give me an example where the State has exercised this right to take away an individual’s water rights in Colorado? Eric – I did not state they have the right to take it away. The whole water rights legal system has been set up at the beginning at the highest level in the country is when you have a water system, that is in-between states, the states work out who gets how much water from that source. Then within the state, the legal theory is that the state owns the water, and they have the right to decision on rights to use that water. In the State of Colorado, the state’s ownership of water is an abstract concept because the Colorado Constitution states that all citizens have the right to acquire property rights to use that water. A lot of time people often say that they own that water but really, they are talking about the right to use it. I think we are saying the same thing, but regarding graywater, when it comes to the homes of citizens and it being used, we need to make sure that use is in conformance with our set of particular sets of water rights. I think this is why we are trying to set up the system we are. − Kevin – Q – What was the driver behind not being able to use graywater for underground or drip irrigation, is it because they will use it out of the system? Eric – A – Northern Water has a contract with the federal government that NATURAL RESOURCES ADVISORY BOARD TYPE OF MEETING – REGULAR 0 4 /20/2022 – MINUTES Page 9 they are bound to on where they can allow people to use and reuse Colorado Big Thompson Project (CBTP) water. Northern Water and the project are tied at the hip because of these contractual agreements with the federal government. In the 1930s when they built the project, they went to the federal government and asked for money. The federal government in return said yes but here is a contract with all these limitations. One limitation is the right to reuse CBTP water. Use of graywater for irrigation outside of the actual building looks more like reuse as opposed to cycling the water through. After speaking to them, I don’t think the rule will be loosened up anytime soon. Kevin – From a water conservation perspective it comes from the same place, so having to pull more for irrigation is a hard pill to swallow. I am not sure how to advocate that for being revisited. Knowing that and seeing it is just for toilet flushing is good, and most of us support the opportunity to reduce water use for that, but it feels hard from a City investment standpoint because of all the other conservation projects. Financial motivation or awarding citizens for making those changes seems more substantial − Kevin – Q – What percentage of water can even be touched? Mariel – A – 7-8% of annual water use per person if every time you flush the toilet you use graywater. − Kevin – Q – Since this would be mainly for new developments, can you break it down to say we think that if some percentage of new development added this that it would save this amount? I am a little disheartened by it since its only toilet flushing; it seems so small. Eric – A – I think there are lots of things we don’t know about the impacts of graywater on the overall system. If you think of the river and greater Fort Collins utilities system, even with water conservation, it can save the amount that Fort Collins utilities would take off the Poudre River and reservoir into its system. But you would have to do a model or analysis that the water we did not divert is taken up by other ditches. It could be complex depending on the area of study. Mariel - I think highlighting the fact that getting an ordinance passed and having the opportunity for this to happen. I think there are opportunities down the road to find grant funding or incentives to make this a little more desirable. Kevin – It is great groundwork − Eric – I am going to comment on the question Avneesh asked in the chat about the city doing the treatment to graywater for the public. That would push it out of the graywater legal regium and into a separate regium. That is something I have heard resurfaced here and there, but it is a reuse purple pipe system. − Kevin – It might be neat to see if there are any city facilities or public facilities NATURAL RESOURCES ADVISORY BOARD TYPE OF MEETING – REGULAR 0 4 /20/2022 – MINUTES Page 10 that could be spearheads for this where there is a more significant amount of usage. Recommendation − Dawson- I am in favor of writing a memo but wants to see how the rest of the board feels − Kevin agrees to support with the hope that it can be pioneered with the City if it financially makes sense. − Others agree with the sentiment that it might not be the most significant up front but has potential to create more down the road. − Hillary appreciates what Kevin said about how we can use this to make bigger change and push it forward. Small steps are important and believes if they do a memo, they should make sure to include that aspect of their opinions. − Kevin motions to write a memo in support of the policy implementation of using graywater as defined for its uses and nodding to the opportunity for the City to seek areas where that is most applicable to larger water saving opportunities within that memo. Drew seconds. Motion passes 6-0-1. − Barry is confused on the ownership of water since it is counter to the issues he has worked on for years. He is in support of graywater but who owns the water in its reuse and who is compensated monetarily for the reuse of that water is a big open question he would like to see answered. − Kevin – Q – Is your concern that there is a disconnect in their understanding and misinterpretation in the context of graywater or otherwise water rights; does that give you a pause or concern? Barry – I don’t claim to be a water rights expert, but I have been involved in a lot of water related issues throughout my career. Regarding Southwest Colorado, where they don’t have enough water to plant their crops, if the state owns the water, how come they can’t intervene? I have done a fair amount of work internationally and it comes down to who owns the water. With the cost falling on the individual households, that is a non-starter for me and is not going to happen. Kevin – The question at this point is, is it worth having it in the code for the ability to do this if you want to or if down the road there are grants or changes in interpretation in use potentials that this be a possibility. That is what is in front of us now. Right now, it is not possible, so that is what we are talking about here, do we want that to be a possibility in code for that to even be a thought. It could be picked up and hopefully increase momentum in a case that water continues to become more and more scarce. That those saved water gallons by the small number will be increased to a larger opportunity overtime. NATURAL RESOURCES ADVISORY BOARD TYPE OF MEETING – REGULAR 0 4 /20/2022 – MINUTES Page 11 − Barry changes his mind in support of the memo vs abstaining. − Drew suggests that they could add a motion to included some of the language in the memo to the City Council regarding all particulars being discussed, water rights, and how we hope in the future specific elements can be changed. − Kevin – It feels like one of the opportunities is to advocate for use beyond flushing and make a request that the City to its best of its ability advocates at a higher level to expand definition of use and reuse. − Barry is going to do more research on water law. − The board is going to refer to Danielle’s expertise on graywater to help write the memo as they have until August. − Drew motions to amend the memo to City Council regarding graywater to include points in content being more impactful. Kevin seconds. Unanimously passes 7-0. 5. OTHER BUSINESS a. Board Member Reports − Barry – Barry approached Lisa with Rights of Nature group to present during the public participation. − Kevin – Bicycle advisory committee met last month. They spoke about the new safety stop state law that makes it legal for bicycles to not come to a full stop at stop signs when it is deemed safe, and no other users are at intersection. The legislative committee at the City decided not so to support it even after they wrote a memo to them. This law is good for under- represented groups that may end up discriminated against when getting pulled over for something like that. They also discussed budgeting for outcomes, how it comes into play with the active mode budget offers, and how they can tee up some larger incentive items to promote multi-moto for Council. They are hoping to see of that related to Vision Zero. Draft bicycle networks recommendations are now closed for input but feel free to reach out to the team for opportunities in the city. b. Six Month Calendar Review − The Board discussed the option to have an in-person board meeting as it would be nice to meet everyone in person but for environmental reason go back to virtual meetings after. They decided on an in-person meeting for their May 18th Board meeting. NATURAL RESOURCES ADVISORY BOARD TYPE OF MEETING – REGULAR 0 4 /20/2022 – MINUTES Page 12 − Board members looked at upcoming subjects through the summer. There was interest shown in land use code, trash/recycling contracting, active modes plan draft recommendations, Halligan water supply project update, and budget review. 6. ADJOURN - 8:36 pm