Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutAir Quality Advisory Board - Minutes - 07/24/2001MINUTES CITY OF FORT COLLINS AIR QUALITY ADVISORY BOARD REGULAR MEETING 281 N. COLLEGE AVE. July 24, 2001 For Reference: Eric Levine, Chair 229-5225 Eric Hamrick, Council Liaison 225-2343 Brian Woodruff, Staff Liaison 221-6604 Board Members Present Nancy York, John Schroeer, Eric Levine, Jim Dennison, Mandar Sunthankar, Linda Stanley Board Members Absent Harry Edwards, Dan Voss Staff Present Natural Resources Department: Lucinda Smith, Terry Klahn Transportation Planning: Mark Jackson Advance Planning: Ken Waido Guests None The meeting was called to order at 4:35. I-25 Subarea Plan, Ken Waido This plan covers an area from Anheuser-Busch on the north, to County Road 32 on the south, one mile east of I-25 to County Road 5, and mile to the west of I-25. The east side reflects a mirror image of the west, with a few differences. One difference is, on the west side, the employment areas extend at least a half mile, and sometimes more than a mile. Those districts will be held to'/a mile of the interstate on the east. In conjunction, we propose to upgrade the infrastructure, increasing two lane county roads to four lane collectors, with the intent that interaction and travel will be done on the alternative roads, and people will not be forced to use the interstate. A model is the program that is a result of the Fossil Creek Area plan. The UGA was amended. Those parts brought in became TDU receiving areas, with density allowed above and beyond what was typically allowed. • Stanley: Why can't you do that inside the current UGA, but outside the city limits? They have county zoning. If you don't use it there, you're automatically up -zoning those folks. Why give that away? That's an option we've looked at. Part of the argument is that the areas in the GMA have been therefor 16 years. Commitments have been made to those properties. There aren't many of those areas. I'm pretty optimistic about the TDU program. The units are coming from the WellingtonlFort Collins community separator area. If we look at using Boxelder as a dividing line it kills the TDU program for areas that are outside of the GMA. That's why we show urban to County Road 5. There are some things beyond the colors, such as policy and land use restrictions, and design guidelines. The City's land use is commercial and strip development along the highway. In the land use code there are secondary uses allowed in those zones, things like supportive retail for neighborhood convenience. In the Mountain Vista plan there's a restriction against the secondary uses Air Quality Advisory Board July 24, 2001 Page 2 of 7 allowed within a 1/a mile of the interstate. None of the purple areas on the trap would have secondary uses, it would be strictly employment type uses. Having design guidelines similar to the design guideline for the Harmony Corridor will help aesthetics. There is a prohibition of highway commercial uses in the neighborhood shopping center. We don't want it to become an interstate interchange. We want to restrict it to neighborhood serving commercial uses. • Stanley: My question is broader, other than the TDU program, can you give me a compelling reason why Fort Collins should go east of I-25? Our reasoning is to try to meet the goal of letting people work, shop and play in their neighborhood, also the carrying forth of alternative transportation modes and extending transit. • Stanley: It seems that when we go east of the interstate VMT will go up, we will be producing more sprawl, and more driving. What is our geographic size going to end up being? Also, this stuff is going to cost a lot of money. The City has made policies about growing to the south, we can't go west, and given what's happening out east, even if we said we needed to go further east than County Road 5, I don't think that would be an option. I see a physical limitation there. Even if this plan was adopted tomorrow it's going to take a while for sequential development to get out there. As far as cost, we mentioned the $112 million price tag. That's what we've calculated. Seventy million is the interchange improvement needs. I don't have an answer for how some of those will be paid for. The State will improve things on the state highway system. The Windsor and Mulberry exit will be done with state and federal funds. Prospect is not part of the state system. Development will pay for the infrastructure improvements. • Levine: Growth puts strain on the entire transportation grid. For all we know the growth is driving people to drive more miles in and of itself. For all intents and purposes, the denser we get, the more people seem to drive. • Jackson: That's contingent on alternatives. If you increase to a critical point, and rely only on automobiles, there has to be a balance in the mix. • Levine: That's why I agree with the Mason Street project, instead of projects miles east of here. • Levine: Do you, as planners, believe in the concept of Urban Growth Boundaries? That depends on what the "U" stands for. I'm hearing people saying the "U" should stand for "ultimate" growth area. It was meant to be a planning tool. • Levine: What would that area add to the entire area of our city? We're talking about four square miles, maybe 5%. It has a capacity of six thousand units. • York: What was the level of service under alternative 2? We didn't run that, alternative two didn't have any development east of the interstate. • York: Who prefers this alternative? I hate that term. Obviously the property owners, and some of the residents like the idea of not having to drive to town for simple grocery shopping. Supporters of the affordable housing community say the city needs more land for affordable housing. We're getting input from lots of groups and listen to all of the comments. • York: In the I-25 Regional Plan it was mentioned that the developers talked abut assessing a per unit charge. How would that play with affordable housing, is this something Fort Collins would consider? Affordable housing has no breaks on impact fees, they have to pay the same. There are programs to subsidize payment so the fees are not passed on, but there is no waiver granted to affordable housing. If we were to setup new fees they would be applied across the board to every type of development. Air Quality Advisory Board July 24, 2001 Page 3 of 7 • Levine: A point I want to make is, if you add 20.000 more people, the impact on the core streets is going to be hundreds of times greater. Look outside, you can see what we're doing. It's turning into a real city. We're providing tremendous amounts of centralized facilities. We're de -centralizing our services quite a bit too. • Levine: We're building a lot of facilities, investing in infrastructure, that people will want to come to, and at the same time we're saying yes to sprawl that's well outside the core. The small centers you're going to build can't provide what we need. • York: I'm concerned about air quality. This will cause more VMT, there's no question, and it will be more than the population growth. I prefer alternative 2, making I-25 the boundary, and using the area east of I-25 as our community separator. That is the best plan for air quality. • Levine: There have been studies that may show that slower moving traffic creates less pollution. • Stanley: We started with the assumption that it's going to grow anyway, so what are going to do to make it better. I reject that assumption. There is a growth management illusion delusion that things will be ok, but things are getting worse. I feel like we're planning for more congestion, worse air quality, and we'll be asked to pay for it. There's no way I could support this plan. I'm still not convinced growth will pay for itself. A city reaches it's optimal scale between 50 and 75 thousand, after that, because of adding roads, making connections, the increases are bigger and bigger. • Sunthankar: I agree with that to some extent. Is there going to be a tax increase, or are we planning so that there wont be a tax increase? We recognize there's a funding gap. I don't have the answers. • Stanley: What is the current funding gap for maintenance, I think it's pretty significant? I can only see us getting further and further behind. That's why they'll put this road package with the Mason Street Corridor on the ballot. We're being asked to subsidize growth and pay for screwing up our quality of life. • Sunthankar: I don't think we are screwing up the quality of life in this town, but how are we going to balance it? You can't have beautiful growth if you don't pay taxes. • York: In the discussion about annexing Coyote Ridge and CFP there was talk about the additional costs to increase the service. I would hope that you would project those costs, and give an accurate representation of what it will really cost the taxpayers if we were to annex east and build all of that. • Sunthankar: We've glossed over the VMT growth because of this plan. • Jackson: The memo breaks down VMT by level of service. • Stanley: What about the total VMT? • Jackson: We didn't do that, we used VHT and VMT, we can ask them to go back and do it. • York: If I-25 becomes so congested with truck traffic caused by the Mexico to Canada transportation plan, will the commercial areas be eager to locate there? • Jackson: I'm project manager for this round of the truck route study. • York: Then you'd be the person to look into the air quality and health issue. In Denver last year there was a study where they said that children who live alongside congested areas have rates of cancer six times the normal. That is something that merits an investigation. • Levine: Land use and transportation codes should have health based criteria. • Levine: There is a request from the board to see more VMT projections. Air Quality Advisory Board July 24, 2001 Page 4 of 7 Minutes With the following changes, the minutes of the June 26, 2001 were approved: Page 4, 12`h bullet: Add "this is a stepping stone to the Regional Transportation Authority" Page 1, 4`h bullet: Change 75,000 to 175,000 The minutes were unanimously approved as amended. Review Action Loe 1. When the radon program is reviewed by City Council, put a copy of their packet materials in the Board's packet — When Available — Smith: The question is if City Council should have a study session, or should it just be handled with the code changes. Is it appropriate to act council input on a staff workplan, that's what we're asking the City Manager. Whenever this goes to Council you will get it too. 2. Arrange for distribution to AQAB members of minutes and memos to City Council from the T-Board, P&Z Board, and NRAB — Continuing discussion later in the meeting. 3. Obtain copies of the I-25 Regional Plan- Done 4. With respect to the CO redesignation analysis, ask APCD staff: • To make clear what VMT growth assumptions were used and • To use the correct fraction of SUV's in the vehicle fleet Brian asked the State, they said it will make it clear in the documentation. The SUV fraction is on the low side, but the pickup fraction is on the high side. There is not an opportunity to change it. If the SIP is looked at again, updated numbers will be used. Election of Officers Eric Levine and Linda Stanley were elected chair and vice -chair respectively. AQAB Organizational Issues Lucinda Smith reviewed the section of the bylaws pertaining to this issue. • Levine: Most land use and transportation plans are within our purview. • Stanley: That makes sense. • Smith: Do you want to focus on issues that will eventually require a council decision. Would that be a useful criteria? • Levine: I can see instances where something could go to Council that we wouldn't need to weigh in on. • Smith: Brian has suggested that communication and interaction with the council be increased. Nothing prohibits you from picking up the phone and giving them a call. • Stanley: Maybe the chair and/or vice chair should meet with the liaison. • Dennison: It would be nice if he would pop in and introduce himself. • Smith: The board could consider having a board member liaison to other boards, this member could receive the full packet from various boards. Which boards are you most interested in? Eric Levine would like to begin receiving the full Transportation Board packet. Staff will make the arrangements. • Sunthankar: Maybe the AQAB should make yearly presentations to some of the other boards, to let them know the types of issues we are discussing. Smith: There could be reciprocal dialogue. Air Quality Advisory Board July 24, 2001 Page 5 of 7 • Levine: We could send a memo to council, asking them to ask staff if we could work more efficiently. • Stanley: I would like to see how getting the packet works. You'll get an idea of what we're missing, and what we should be seeing. Then we can come up with some sort of ideas or system. • Levine: I would like the board to get more benefit of the range of opinions. I wouldn't mind opening up the presentations to entities outside of staff. • Stanley: That could be on an ad -hoc basis. • Dennison: I would want a good solid presentation from staff, and the other as additional. Short Discussion Items CO Redesignation Smith said the data analysis is due August 6. Are there any other board members who would like to work on the redesignation committee? Eric Levine, Mandar Sunthankar and Jim Dennison are currently on the committee. Agenda Planning Review Council six-month planning calendar Future Agendas • North College Corridor Project (Summer) Smith said this is a road improvement project from Jefferson to the Poudre River. Her sense is this project might have less air quality impact than the truck route. • Northern Colorado Truck Mobility Study Smith said this project has a larger air quality impact. Mark Jackson is anxious to come to the board. • CO Redesignation Nancy York made the following motion: Move that the Air Quality Advisory Board send forth a recommendation that buses are made a primary service. The motion was seconded and unanimously approved. • York: If we want to make a recommendation on the Regional I-25 Corridor Plan, it would have to be tonight. Council will be taking it up on August 17. • Stanley: We didn't come to agreement as a board. I don't support the plan, they're only presenting two options; 1)do nothing, 2) go east of I-25. • York: We know the plan will increase VMT and congestion. It's not a good plan. • York: They need to come up with a land use plan. There is no land use plan in this plan. It is driven by the developers, and the land speculators. They have gone to the various participating cities and got their land use plans and plotted them. Two of the principles in the plan are: - Maximize long-term property values and community benefits within the Corridor by improving the overall quality and functionality of development. - Continue steady economic development in the I-25 Corridor. Air Quality Advisory Board July 24, 2001 Page 6 of 7 • Dennison: I don't feel comfortable with the plan going forward, but I'm not comfortable with what specifics I would recommend. They could take a little more time, get more input and consider other alternatives. That's what we were suggesting in the memo. • Levine: We can restate it as a motion. • York: The State of Colorado is in negotiations with New Mexico or Arizona regarding a major truck route that may go through Colorado, • Sunthankar: I haven't decided if the plan is good or bad. • York: It's a parallel road system, that's the planned element. It's a road plan. They have design standard suggestions. There are references to open lands, vistas, and protecting agricultural land. They're going to wipe agricultural land out. • Sunthankar: The ag land will be gone in ten years. • York: It could be different. • Dennison: I would prefer to make specific recommendations. I don't know if I can get to that point, it may take more time to get up to speed. • Stanley: I prefer they not approve this plan. It's a blueprint for sprawl. Alternative transportation is an afterthought. I can't see that it will improve the air quality. As an area grows bigger and bigger, VMT will go up. And, we will ask the citizens to subsidize the plan. • York: The funding for the city proper in the core area is under funded already. This thing is largely for the development for I-25. • Stanley: Larry Kendall, owner of The Group, said at a County Open Lands board meeting that the goal is to keep that area looking nice so people continue to move here. Not that we want to preserve the Poudre River corridor. He was the one who got the ball rolling, he and a couple of others. • Levine: A lot of the initial meetings were done by the Main Street Private Sector Group. When they say there was a lot of public input, that's half the story. The public input was after the fact, when the plan was already developed. Most of it was done by staff and the private sector interest. • York: If we're going to do a motion, or make a recommendation, of turning this down, one of the reasons should be inadequate land use planning. • Suntankar: That would be a good reason for postponing this. • York: I find this to be a road plan, regional transit should be the goal. • Stanley: It will result in significant increases in VMT, at a time when we are trying to lower the increase in VMT. • Schroeer: It's a road plan, as opposed to a transportation plan. • Levine: The public input was inadequate. • Sunthankar: I like the idea of having the industries within a 1/2 mile of I-25, that's the best location for industry. • Stanely: What about all the housing to the east? That will increase VMT dramatically. • Smith: It would be useful for the board decide which approach you want to take. Do you want to say hold off because the public doesn't know enough about it, or you could recommend they not adopt the plan. • Dennison: I'm comfortable with a recommendation that they vote this plan down. We can give them the rationales. We need a plan, but the process was flawed here too. • York: A few years ago there was a visioning plan, a visual preference survey. This doesn't conform with our visual preference, as far as community separator. Air Quality Advisory Board July 24, 2001 Page 7 of 7 • Sunthankar: We should say they need to take into account the survey that was done. • Stanley: What about the funding piece — subsidies. The funding for the basics are already behind, this will push them even further behind. It's a much wider service area. • York: I would like to add housing being so close to traffic. There are serious health impacts, especially in the multi -family units in the activity centers. Housing will be'/4 mile from I-25, but in the activity centers. There are studies of much higher cancer rates in children who live in congested areas. • Stanley: I think we should make a general motion, and using the minutes, give the reasons we're opposed to the plan. Lucinda and Eric can then draft the memo. Linda Stanley made the following motion: Move that the Air Quality Advisory Board recommend to City Council that they not approve the Northern Colorado I-25 Corridor Plan, based upon the reasons discussed at this meeting, and to be summarized by our chair. The motion was seconded and unanimously approved. Adjournment The meeting adjourned at 7:35 p.m. ACTION LIST —from July 24, 2001 meetin ACTION ITEM WHO BY... DONE 1. When the radon program is reviewed by City Sarah When Council, put a copy of their packet materials available in the Board's packet. 2. Information on I-25 corridor traffic data and Mark August assumptions Jackson 3. Information on Denver study of health and Eric August nearby highways 4. P&Z Board and Transportation Board Terry September comments regarding I-25 subarea plan 5. Arrange for the Chair to receive the full Terry August Transportation Board packet on a regular basis 6. Municipal Action Plan On Greenhouse Lucinda September Gasses — final version