Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutLand Conservation And Stewardship Board - Minutes - 12/14/2022 Land Conservation & Stewardship Board Regular Meeting | 1745 Hoffman Mill Road December 14, 2022 Members: Andrea Elson, Chair Vicky McLane, Member Ross Cunniff, Vice Chair Alycia Crall, Member Mike Weber, Member Elena Lopez, Member Denise Culver, Member Cole Kramer, Member Joe Piesman, Member 12/14/2022 – MINUTES Page 1 1. CALL TO ORDER: Meeting was called to order at 5:30 p.m. 2. ROLL CALL: Andrea Elson, Ross Cunniff, Elena Lopez, Cole Kramer, Mike Weber, Joe Piesman, Denise Culver, Vicky McLane Excused: Alycia Crall NAD Staff: Katie Donahue, Kristy Bruce, Zoë Shark, AJ Chlebnik, Tawnya Ernst, Alynn Karnes; Charlotte Norville City Staff: Sylvia Tatman-Burruss, Project Manager, City Manager’s Office (CMO) and Ginny Sawyer, Sr. Project Manager, CMO, Dean Klinger, Interim Community Services Director 3. GUESTS: Councilmember Kelly Ohlson, Caitlyn Sheridan, Project Coordinator, Kearns & West; and Morgan Lommele, Director, Kearns & West 4. COMMUNITY PARTICIPANTS: Ellis Carpenter 5. AGENDA REVIEW: Chair Elson amended the agenda to allow for Councilmember Ohlson, and LCSB to thank members whose terms are ending, add time for Councilmember Ohlson to make a statement about the Hughes stakeholder engagement, and a general discussion of the Bicycle Advisory Committee. 6. APPROVAL OF MINUTES: Vice Chair Cunniff made a motion to approve the November LCSB meeting minutes. Member Kramer seconded the motion. The motion was unanimously approved 8-0. 7. DISCUSSION ITEMS: Thank you to exiting board members. Councilmember Kelly Ohlson voiced his and Council’s appreciation to board members Vicky McLane, Mike Weber and Alycia Crall and stated their work on the board made a difference. He invited Members McLane and Weber to comment about their time on the Land Conservation and Stewardship Board. Member McLane described her time on the board as an amazing education and an opportunity to share her knowledge and LCSB has been an important part of that outreach. Chair Elson voiced with her appreciation of Member McLane’s feistiness and DocuSign Envelope ID: 5509B47A-FA2B-443C-ACAE-32A49A33549F Land Conservation & Stewardship Board Regular Meeting 1 2/14/2022 MINUTES Page 2 willingness to passionately defend her positions on issues and thanked her for serving. Member Weber also mentioned the educational aspect of serving on the board and his gratitude for the opportunity. He appreciated learning about the LCSB perspective, process, and history. He also stated the hope that his time on the board, as perhaps more recreation focused than other members, helped to increase an understanding that conservation and recreation are not mutually exclusive. Members, Kramer and Cunniff stated their appreciation for the diversity of opinions on the LCSB and how diversity enriches discussion and can help members find common ground. Member Kramer reiterated Member Weber’s about the value a recreation perspective brings to the board discussions. Vice Chair Cunniff also thanked Member McLane for your effective voice before Council. Councilmember Ohlson noted there is still one opening on the board, and instructions from the Clerk’s Office for filling the vacancy will be coming in the next few weeks. He also stated his intention to attend the January 11, 2023, meeting to welcome incoming members Scott Mason and Holger Kley. Hughes Stakeholder Engagement Sylvia Tatman-Burruss, Project Manager made a brief introduction of the Hughes Stakeholder Engagement process being managed by the communications firm Kearns & West. Kearns & West are in the early stage of the engagement process regarding the potential reuse of the former Hughes Stadium property and will be conducting extensive outreach in the next few weeks. They are currently presenting to various advisory boards and commissions to determine board priorities and identify any community groups they might have missed. They anticipate going to Council in late February-early March 2023 with potential use scenarios for the site. Morgan Lommele and Caitlin Sheridan led LCSB through a brief review of the project milestones, ballot language, public engagement work to date, and the next steps needed in preparing site use scenarios for Council. The ballot language specifies permitted uses of the property which guided Kearns & West in determining which members of the community to contact. The ballot language also frames the questions posed to the community regarding priorities and potential uses. Kearns and West communicated there is some flexibility in the site development within the constraints of both the ballot language and existing uses (disc golf course and water detention area are likely to remain). Morgan stated that Kearns & West are specialists in determining appropriate ways to engage with a variety of community members, and they employ an assortment of tools to gather feedback. Morgan then listed several of the outreach efforts to date: Online survey available on the City’s engagement hub Our City, three focus groups discussions (wildlife restoration, recreation, and raptor rescue and recovery), conversations with indigenous community members and city staff working with the indigenous community, and informational mailers sent to 700 households adjacent to the site. Input from the three focus groups included creating a regional destination for wildlife recovery or bike recreation and capitalizing on the open land to attract visitors to Fort Collins. Kearns & West recently met with the Natural Areas Department DocuSign Envelope ID: 5509B47A-FA2B-443C-ACAE-32A49A33549F Land Conservation & Stewardship Board Regular Meeting 1 2/14/2022 MINUTES Page 3 and learned of the site characteristics and potential for restoration; this information will also be included in the scenarios. In the next several weeks of continued engagement activities, Kearns & West will deepen outreach to indigenous peoples and community members who represent the interests of indigenous peoples, pursue conversations with the Parks and Recreation Departments, and increase community awareness of the online survey. They will also be presenting to other boards and commissions. The culmination of community feedback collected will be distilled in to 4 or 5 different scenarios. They will likely seek additional input from the community prior to finalizing possible use scenarios for presentation to Council. Discussion Councilmember Ohlson opened the discussion emphasizing he was speaking for himself, not on behalf of Council. He first stated his objection to the use of “stakeholder” as it has come to represent special interest groups rather than people who have and continue to work for and support open space for its intrinsic value. He is not aware of the City nor Kearns & West having met with the leaders of Planning Action to Transform Hughes Sustainably (PATHS) or leaders of any other citizen-led open space initiatives and asked why that had not occurred. Councilmember Ohlson voiced opposition to reuse scenarios that would provide a regional draw or function as tourist attractions. He is interested in providing open space, wildlife habitat and recreation for the people that live in the area. Sylvia Tatman-Burrus reiterated they are in the early stage of the engagement process and part of the feedback they are seeking from boards and commission is to identify additional groups for engagement. Councilmember Ohlson also stressed the need to communicate with the community the Natural Areas funding constraints and budget transparency for the project. Chair Elson asked if Kearns & West planned to come back to LCSB to present the scenarios before taking them to Council, with Sylvia Tatman-Burrus replying yes they could share scenarios or groupings of uses, but would not yet have fully developed plans. Ginny Sawyer, Sr. Project Manager, reminded everyone there is no funding for implementation, this is likely a long- term plan. City staff will want to accurately assess what community wants and be able to outline some rough costs and the processes to realize the proposed scenarios. Vice Chair Cunniff asked if K & W included fiscal information in the community engagement; is the public being informed about funding sources and associated constraints. Natural Areas expenditures are specifically defined by the ballot that funds Natural Areas. Morgan replied it is Kearns & West’s intention to provide Council with a clear view of the scenario options including rough costs estimates, and to be very clear during community outreach in conveying there is no budget. In response to member Culver, Sylvia Tatman-Burruss stated funding sources outside of the City budget process are being explored. Katie Donahue, Director explained that because several city departments utilize Great Outdoors Colorado (GOCO) grants there are ongoing conversations, especially among Community Services, in prioritizing requests. Ginny restated everyone is communicating there is no budget but also recognized a responsibility to be prepared to respond to community expectations and having ideas for funding mechanisms. DocuSign Envelope ID: 5509B47A-FA2B-443C-ACAE-32A49A33549F Land Conservation & Stewardship Board Regular Meeting 1 2/14/2022 MINUTES Page 4 In response to Councilmember Ohlson’s question as to why the PATHS organizers were not consulted at the beginning of the outreach, Ginny Sawyer reiterated the city does want to make sure they connect with those voices and asked board members share contact information. She also pointed to the Parks and Recreation Master plan which included a statistically valid survey identifying community needs and the City’s plan to utilize the data to help inform the priorities for reuse scenarios. Sylvia Tatman-Burrus said they have not yet conducted Indigenous outreach and are coordinating with the City’s Equity Office before starting that conversation. Member Lopez responded that the PATHS group is still active and looking forward to participating in outreach. They would love an opportunity to convey the importance of the spirit of law with the priority to protect it for wildlife habitat. She also noted the three pioneering members of the group are indigenous people and yet no one has reached out to them. At Chair Elson’s request, Katie Donahue summarized the conversation between the Natural Areas Department and Kearns & West. Topics covered included the limitations on how NAD funds can be spent, the department’s framework for land conservation prioritization, and very rough costs estimates for habitat restoration and mitigation (many unknowns about stadium demolition) on the Hughes site. They also discussed the purchase fee arrangement which is subject to change depending on the final acreage to be managed by Natural Areas. Additionally, Katie explained no formal resource assessment of the site will be done until after acquisition: an inventory of species, habit restoration opportunities, trail connectivity, etc. Several board members expressed concern for hazardous waste on the site with Member Kramer asking if the seller can be held liable for any remediation not addressed prior to closing. Member Lopez followed by stating there are many assumptions about contamination that may or may not exist and suggested putting those assumptions aside until a formal resource assessment has been conducted. She added the PATHS group has some information to share in that regard. Vice- Chair Cunniff agreed it’s best to make zero assumptions and look for best restoration opportunities on the site. Morgan confirmed that Kearns & West will reach out to those who helped pass the ballot measure. She then invited board members to share any perspectives or opinions not yet captured. Several board members were adamant that Natural Areas funds be used only for land conservation and restoration. Recreation uses should not be funded with Natural Areas dollars nor should the construction of wildlife or raptor recovery buildings. Member Piesman stated these other items might be candidates for public-private partnerships. Vice Chair Cunniff and Member Kramer stressed any aspect of the site not managed by natural areas should still strive for low maintenance features to control costs and consider native landscaping (low water use). Katie Donahue added there has been some discussion about potential Nature in the City projects and funding at the site. Member Lopez asked again for clarification around GOCO funding for land acquisition. Katie Donahue replied that GOCO has specific goals for awarding grants and perhaps this site did not align. Zoë Shark, Public Engagement Program Manager added GOCO only funds acquisitions for properties selling at appraised value. Member Piesman stated the property should not be dismissed as a parking lot and described the habitat on the west side as pretty rich. He reported seeing a juvenile moose on the west side about four years ago, and more recently a bobcat crossed in front of his bike near to the former stadium site. DocuSign Envelope ID: 5509B47A-FA2B-443C-ACAE-32A49A33549F Land Conservation & Stewardship Board Regular Meeting 1 2/14/2022 MINUTES Page 5 Member Piesman suggested connecting with the frequent users of Maxwell perhaps via trailhead tabling. Member Kramer asked if informational signage could be installed to raise public awareness of the survey. Katie Donahue explained Natural Areas is not managing the public engagement for this project but offered to check with the City Manager’s Office regarding signage. Charlotte Norville, Public Engagement Specialist offered to include the survey information in the department’s January newsletter. Vice Chair Cunniff pointed out the survey information and link are not on the City’s website home page. Sylvia Tatman-Burrus explained the survey has been shared with groups they’ve connected with, and the link will go out to general public on January 1st. Katie Donahue shared that she recommended to K & W to present to LCSB early in the process. Some of the future outreach mechanisms and groups to contact identified during this meeting are in fact on their list for the coming weeks. Chair Elson stated it would have been helpful if the presentation outlined the broader scope of the process as much of the conversation was focused on planning and use concepts. Member Kramer stated the LCSB has not seen the survey or any other materials. He asked if the survey and other engagement mechanisms are offered in both English and Spanish, and if underserved communities are being engaged. Member Lopez thanked everyone for their work and asserted the community wanted the property preserved and it will become a great asset. She also expressed a need to restore trust between the City and the public, including the PATHS group. Morgan Lommele thanked everyone for their insight, input, and perspective. 1041 Regulations Vice Chair Cunniff reported on the feedback and discussion of the subcommittee, much of which was whether to limit 1041 to natural areas and parks, or to cover the entire city and growth management area. Several committee members including Member Cunniff advocated for expanding the geographic area subject to regulations. It would be useful in regulating projects that might interact with parks and natural areas, i.e., water flows from these projects into our stream sheds. Vice Chair Cunniff also reported it was Council’s decision to limit 1041 regulations to water, wastewater, and transportation and to not include electric and natural gas utility lines. He suggested if LCSB wanted to make a recommendation to Council to expand 1041 regulations to cover the larger geographic area and include utility lines, doing so in January 2023, prior to Council work sessions would be ideal. Members Lopez and Kramer expressed concern about Council’s decision to narrow the geographic scope to a small subset of areas in the city. Member Kramer asked if there was a downside to adding gas and electric utility lines to 1041; could it be as simple as adding appropriate language? It was Vice Chair Cunniff’s opinion that adding those two items would likely involve discussions with utility providers and require staff direction from Council. He suggests the LCSB move forward with preparing a memo and making a recommendation to Council to add gas and electric utility lines to be subject to 1041 regulations Bicycle Advisory Committee Member Weber stated there was not a lot to share other than the ongoing discussion of Vision DocuSign Envelope ID: 5509B47A-FA2B-443C-ACAE-32A49A33549F Land Conservation & Stewardship Board Regular Meeting 1 2/14/2022 MINUTES Page 6 Zero plan: working toward a total of zero fatal or serious-injury crashes on the city’s transportation network. He explained the plan is related to Natural Areas because so many trails used for recreation are also part of the transportation network. A benefit of cyclist using natural areas trails reduces the number of bikes on the streets, thereby increasing safety. Moving forward, the Bicycle Advisory Committee (BAC) will become the Active Modes Advisory Committee to better encompass all non-vehicle modes of transportation. The City is finding the community using more alternative forms of transportation including hoverboards and e-bikes both of which are prohibited in Natural Areas. Vice Chair Cunniff asked if there was any discussion around managing or mitigating dangerous speeds on the mixed-use trail system. Member Weber replied there has been discussion and it’s primarily the responsibility of Parks to manage the trail system; they have posted signs and warn users but have limited capacity to enforce compliance. Member Weber stated the increased use is a tradeoff between the quiet contemplation or recreation in natural area and the safety of getting cyclists off the streets. Member Weber reported the BAC also discussed their work plan and is recruiting board members as well. In response to Member Lopez’s inquiry about overpasses and underpasses, he stated those are significant expenses and that Bike FC comes to the BAC meeting each month with areas of concern resulting in conversations around short- and long-term solutions. Chair Elson thanked Member Weber for the update and his speaking to both sides of cycling activity in the Natural Areas and city. Department Updates Katie Donahue 30th Anniversary Thanked board members for attending and awarded kudos to staff, especially Charlotte Norville and Zoë Shark. Katie Donahue noted there are additional activities planned around the 30th Anniversary including trivia nights at Horse & Dragon. Staffing Update There will job announcements coming soon for ranger vacancies, and staff is currently in the process of temporarily filling the Ranger Supervisor position. Staff is also working to complete the job description for the Environmental Planner position created during 2023-24 BFO process. Land Conservation GOCO awarded a grant Larimer County for the purchase of the Buckeye property north of Laporte. Tawnya will update LCSB on the purchase details as part the of Quarterly Land Conservation update during the January meeting. Boards and Commissions meeting structure Because LCSB is a not a quasi-judicial advisory board, it is permissible to continue with the DocuSign Envelope ID: 5509B47A-FA2B-443C-ACAE-32A49A33549F Land Conservation & Stewardship Board Regular Meeting 1 2/14/2022 MINUTES Page 7 hybrid meeting format currently in place. Northern Integrated Supply Project (NISP) The Army Corps of Engineers issued a Record of Decision (ROD) on Friday, December 9th for the NISP project. Staff sent a memo to Council notifying them of the ROD and will bring a summary of the ROD to Council in the coming weeks. Staff will also share the summary with LCSB. 8. ADJOURNMENT The meeting was adjourned at 7:22 p.m. Andrea Elson, Chair Date DocuSign Envelope ID: 5509B47A-FA2B-443C-ACAE-32A49A33549F 1/20/2023