Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutNATURAL RESOURCES ADVISORY BOARD - MINUTES - 06/18/20251 6/18/2025 - Minutes Natural Resources Advisory Board REGULAR MEETING Wednesday, June 18, 2025 – 6:00 PM 222 Laporte Avenue and via Microsoft Teams 1. CALL TO ORDER: 6:03 PM 2. ROLL CALL a. Board Members Present – • Kelly Stewart (Chair) • Dawson Metcalf (newly elected Vice Chair) • Barry Noon • Kelen Dowdy • Leslie Coleman • Sharel Erickson • Xavier Perei ra • Sara LoTemplio • Teagan Loew (arrived late) b. Board Members Absent – • None c. Staff Members Present – • Grant Stump, Lead Specialist, Acting Staff Liaison d. Guest(s) – • Amy Gage, Active Modes Data Specialist • Rachel Ruhlen, FC Moves Transportation Planner 3. AGENDA REVIEW Chair Metcalf reviewed the agenda items. 4. COMMUNITY MEMBER PARTICIPATION 5. APPROVAL OF MINUTES – MAY 2025 Metcalf made a motion, seconded by Pereira, to approve the May 2025 regular meeting minutes as written. The motion was adopted unanimously. 2 6/18/2025 - Minutes 6. NEW BUSINESS a. 15-Minute City Council Priorities Amy Gage, Active Modes Data Specialist, provided an overview of the 15-Minute City concept, which is essentially th e ability for an individual to reach the majority of their destinations within a 15-minute bike ride or walk. Gage stated a consultant was hired to conduct a 15-Minute City analysis for the City in 2022, and the City opted to take the analysis in -house with some updated destinations and roadwork data. She noted some of the roadwork projects reduced traffic stress, which is determined by traff ic volume, speed limit, and infrastructure, and it influences the scores for destinations. She stated the destination categories include bus stops, childcare providers, civic centers, grocery stores, schools, employers, medical and retail centers, social services, natural areas, and parks. She noted the destination categories were weighted differently based on feedback from City priorities and the public. Gage showed images of the map of the 2024 analysis as compared to the 2022 analysis for the bicycle network score and the pedestrian network score. She provided a list of next steps for the future, including having regular, automatic updates to the inputs (road network, census data, destinations), factoring in population density with existing results, and adding more detailed pedestrian access with ADA information and equity areas to the model. Gage requested input from the Board Members regarding what may be missing from the model. Noon asked about the basic input data. Gage replied on input is the census blocks, which are the geographic units to which the scores are ascribed, the second is the road network with levels of traffic stress, and the third is the destinations. The score is essentially the number of destinations that can be accessed within 15-minutes while being on the lower stress levels of the roadway network. Noon commented on research he has done with wildlife and radio transmitters to identify pinch points, or areas with a disproportionately high volume of use, and the protection status of the pinch points, to help facilitate flow. Noon suggested using more of a color gradient in the maps. Members and Gage discussed how the data can be used, including helping to prioritize projects, identifying areas that might need attention, incentivizing development, informing zoning, expanding trails, and creating satellite locations for government offices and libraries. Gage noted the data has been normalized based on the number of destinations. It was noted that getting feedback from community members as to what a 15-Minute City means to them would be valuable, particularly in terms of destinations. Members commented on having difficulty identifying what the maps are attempting to 3 6/18/2025 - Minutes communicate. Gage suggested some of this data is more valuable for the decision - makers. LoTemplio asked what constitutes high - versus low -stress roadways. Gage replied that is changing in terms of how things are evaluated now as different types of protected areas for vulnerable users are installed. She noted there is an individual who developed the level of traffic stress classification system, which is a complex matrix involving the number of lanes, width of bike lane, type of infrastructure, traffic volume, and traffic speed. She noted that system is used to identify stress levels in the road network. Additionally, the high -injury network can be overlayed to identify areas of stress. LoTemplio asked about the community’s comfort level with an intersection having a stress rating of 3 for example. Gage replied stress levels 1 and 2 were scored; however, levels 3 and 4 were found to be too uncomfortable for most riders. She noted comfort levels are extremely variable. Pereira suggested it could be useful to have a benchmark number that could be used to categorize the data in terms of census blocks meeting, exceeding, or being below the criteria for a 15-Minute City. Loew asked if this information will ultimately be used to inform future development. Gage replied in the affirmative and noted it is only one tool, though the hope is that improvements will be made to make it more useful. b. Which Wheels Go Where? – August Work Session Rachel Ruhlen, FC Moves Transportation Planner, stated Which Wheels Go Where is exploring how to accommodate more kinds of micro-mobility devices, as micro-mobility supports Our Climate Future, Active Modes, Vision Zero, and 15-Minute City goals. She noted the project has occurred concurrently with the Strategic Trails Update. Ruhlen outlined the current Code regulations for various forms of micro-mobility and noted the current system of categories is somewhat onerous. She stated the proposal is to form two categories: human -powered or lightweight electric, which is defined by going 20 miles per hour or less. She stated anything that can go faster than that would be considered a low -powered scooter. Ruhlen outlined the proposal for addressing where each type of vehicle can be ridden. Ruhlen discussed the public survey conducted last year related to concern s about each facility and each type of vehicle. She noted the community engagement summary summarized the open comments provided as part of the survey and stated overall themes were related to accommodating more kinds of micro-mobility, protecting pedestrians, people with disabilities, seniors, and children, and the fact that it is not what vehicle is being ridden, it is how it is being ridden that matters. Ruhlen noted Fort Collins Police had been very concerned that allowing skateboards on streets w ould lead to severe crashes; therefore, staff had a conversation with Boulder Police as Boulder has allowed skateboards on streets since 2021. Boulder Police reported they were also initially concerned about an increase in crashes; however, that has turned out not to be the case. She stated the safety education approach for 4 6/18/2025 - Minutes handling issues on trails has been supported. Additionally, Park Rangers utilize an ‘authority of the resource’ approach when talking with trail users who may have violated speed limits or other regulations. Ruhlen discussed the CSU regulations for which vehicles are allowed where and noted the proposed changes would help with consistency with the campus. She outlined the staff proposal for allowing all micro-mobility devices to be ridden in crosswalks, on sidewalks, and on paved trails or multi -use paths, with the exception of dismount zones. Ruhlen noted the Strategic Trails Plan includes a trail safety education campaign which would incorporate messaging on social media and refreshed signage with a focus on behavior. There are also some infrastructure changes proposed as well as a Bicycle Ambassador Program which would include routine trail pop-up events. Ruhlen requested feedback from Board Members. Coleman commented on scooters in Denver causing issues on sidewalks due to unsafe and careless riders. She stated the regulations were changed to only allow for riding scooters on the sidewalk if the street speed is above 35 miles per hour. She asked if a citation could be given to an E-scooter rider who was riding on the sidewalk in an unsafe manner. Ruhlen replied staff is looking at ensuring there are ordinances in the Code that would allow for behavior-focused citations. She also noted the trails have a cou rtesy speed limit of 15 miles per hour; however, there are discussions about codifying that, though Police Services is concerned about having associated enforcement expectations. c. Water Efficiency Plan – Memo Refinement Metcalf provided a draft memo regarding the Board’s recommendation to City Council concerning the Water Effi ciency Plan. Members discussed the Plan’s 4% water use reduction goal and it was noted no other alternatives were offered to help determine if that number is reasonable or if the goal should be higher. Metcalf commented on the desire to see more metrics and information related to how benchmarks are created. Noon commended City staff and commented on how water issues are global in nature. He suggested that what is communicated is the trend in use versus the trends in availability. Dowdy suggested including that information in the upcoming Integrated Water Resources Plan which would address demand and water availability in a better fashion than the Water Efficiency Plan. Noon stated the extent to which efficiency is important is a function of the difference between demand and availability. Metcalf stated he wanted to see more education materials about climate-based scenarios in reference to the cost of inaction piece. He also stated he sees every tool as a behavior change tool. Dowdy commented on taking away barriers to the preferred behavior. Coleman commented on efficiency being less expensive than purchasing new water and 5 6/18/2025 - Minutes suggested the Plan could include additional information from an economic perspective as a messaging tool. Noon stated it seems that the reason staff has taken the steps to develop an Efficiency Plan is because, at some level, they are acknowledging that demand is approaching the crossover point with availability. He stated an Efficiency Plan would not be necessary if a resource is not limiting and suggested the need for the Plan should be included in the Plan. Metcalf questioned whether another strategy piece should be added. He also stated he does not have enough contextual information to suggest the 4% number should be increased. Members discussed suggesting an explanation be provided in the document. Metcalf noted that was already planned as the Water Commission also requested that information. LoTemplio made a motion, seconded by Loew, to approve the memo as amended. The motion was adopted unanimously. Noon commented on the importance of including a base year. Metcalf noted the targets are comparing information to what is currently occurring. d. Board Elections Metcalf and Chair Stewart outlined the role of the Vice Chair. Metcalf stated he would be willing to serve as Vice Chair. LoTemplio made a motion, seconded by Noon, to nominate Metcalf as Vice Chair. The motion was adopted unanimously. 7. OTHER BUSINESS/UPDATES a. Reminder: Earlier NRAB Meeting Start Time in Begins in July (5:30) Metcalf suggested members further discuss the change given the number of absent individuals at the last meeting. Members generally concurred the 5:30 start time would work and agreed to make the switch starting at the July meeting. b. Board Member Reports Chair Stewart noted there is an August Super Issues Board meeting discussing ranked voting. Metcalf stated the civic assembly made a recommendation for a multi -use site on the Hughes property. He noted the bike park did not reach a majority and the super majority items were a natural area, a multi -use facility with an education focus, and other recreation types. He noted there is a potential petition forthcoming to make the entire site a natural area. It was noted there was a last minute Super Issues meeting scheduled for Monday to 6 6/18/2025 - Minutes discuss the Hughes site recommendations. c. Six Month Calendar Review d. Revisit Action Items from Previous Meetings and Preview of Next Meeting 8. ADJOURNMENT • 8:04 pm Minutes approved by a vote of the Board on 7/16/2025