Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutAir Quality Advisory Board - Minutes - 05/15/2003MINUTES CITY OF FORT COLLINS AIR QUALITY ADVISORY BOARD REGULAR MEETING 281 N. COLLEGE AVE. MAY 15, 2003 For Reference: Linda Stanley, Chair 493-7225 Eric Hamrick, Council Liaison 226-4824 Sarah Fox, Staff Liaison 221-6312 Board Members Present Nancy York, Mandar Sunthankar, Linda Stanley, Katie Walters, Cherie Trine, Ken Moore Board Members Absent Everett Bacon, John Long, Jim Dennison Staff Present Natural Resources Department: Greg Byrne, Sarah Fox, Moore City Attorney's Office: Steve Roy Advance Planning: Ken Waido Transportation Planning: Mark Jackson The meeting was called to order at 5:10 p.m. Terry Klahn, Lucinda Smith, Doug Work Session on Radon Linda Stanley was asked to sit at the table and provide input on the AQAB's reasoning for recommending active systems. Staff is going to look at active systems and provide more information for Council. There are four council members leaning toward active systems. Several members of Council want information on if radon really is a health risk. Minutes With the following changes, the minutes of the April 24, 2003 were unanimously approved. Page 5, last bullet: change "Walter" to "Walters" Page 2, 1" bullet, last sentence; change "it has to be malt" to "but it has to be malted". Change "Something that would perhaps be sustainable would be to grow the barley locally" to "Maybe we should grow the barley locally and look into a malting facility". Page 2, Last bullet: Change "or get stuff we could review" to "or get studies....." Linda Stanley introduced Greg Bryne to the newer board members • York: There are some people saying the cost of an active system is $1400 or $1500. Greg had his house mitigated. • Stanely: There's a big discrepancy about what active systems cost. Some people are mitigating and putting in active systems for less than that. • York: We should call Loveland and others, and ask what the cost of mitigation is. Air Quality Advisory Board May 15, 2003 Page 2 of 5 Proposed Ordinances, Steve Roy Roy said that Eric Hamrick first requested, and some of the other Council members agreed that the Attorney's office should prepare these ordinances for Council consideration. We've sent them to you so you can see what the draft looks like, and get comments, concerns and suggestions. We think it's important for Boards and Commissions to stay within the functions and duties outlined in the code. The functions that you have now do not include making recommendations regarding proposed legislation, such as annexations. Nor do they include making recommendations to the P&Z Board. The proposed changes would allow for both kinds of recommendations, to the extent that those matters involve air quality issues. • York: Does the Transportation Board already do that? • Byrne: No, they do not. • York: If we were to come across studies that might impact zoning, would that be acceptable? I have some concerns about how we would function. • York: So do we have the option of feeding information about studies that we come across? It would be nice to have that window of opportunity. • Roy: That's why these two functions are separated. Maybe it's a good idea to do one, and not the other. That will be Council's decision. • Hamrick: One of the reasons I thought this was important was because in the In -Situ appeal what was missing was a recommendation from the NRAB. NRD was involved, but the NRAB wasn't. This is not intended to slow down the development review process. • Roy: If the concern is a waiver that deviates from the norm, maybe rather than having a general opportunity to review items, a middle ground might be reviewing those kinds of situations. • Trine: When the high school was located across from a plastics plant, no one looked at what might be emitted from the plant, and those kinds of health hazards. • Byrne: I don't think we can review school district siting. • Trine: It could be a day care center, or any similar kind of development. • York: What about the locations of gas stations? • Roy: If the Board could identify instances when it might interested that would help. It would be good to narrow the field. • Roy: Are you interested in these ordinances; or yes, but more narrowly. Can you identify kinds of proposals and types of applications? • Walters: Both of these are important. It's important for us to have an opportunity to give advice on matters that will affect air quality and public health. That's something we should definitely do. • Stanley: We're in the process of having a liaison to the NRAB and the Transportation Board. • Byrne: Maybe it should be a board liaison responsibility to identify the issues you want to advise on. • York: I like the idea of flagging certain things; gas stations, plastic companies, landfills. • Stanley: I think it's better to leave it broader, and leave it open for special cases. • Roy: As I understand your concern, it's that a list might not leave enough flexibility. Another question is whether the applicant has a right to be in attendance when you discuss your concerns about the development proposal and a right to address your concerns at your Air Quality Advisory Board May 15, 2003 Page 3 of 5 meeting. I think the applicant's rights are satisfied by being able to address the board recommendation at the P&Z Board's decision -making hearing. • Sunthankar: Do we assume that you are defining a role more clearly, and not restricting. • Roy: I think this ordinance would expand your role. • Stanley: Personally I'd like to see this move forward. Ken Moore made the following motion: Move that the Air Quality Advisory Board accept the ordinance, and recommend that it be adopted. Nancy York seconded the motion. The motion passed unanimously. • Fox: When does it go to Council? • Roy: Council will have to decide. • Stanley: We need to get a memo out. • York: Last month we made a motion to consider studies and make recommendations to Council. • Stanley: Let's put it on the agenda for later. • Trine: It seems like a variance might be a trigger. • York: This board needs to identify the triggers. Transportation Master Plan, Mark Jackson Jackson said this is the 3`d or 4`h time we talked about the master plan. The other times I've been here we've focused on that we're on a fast track, trying to get this adopted by mid -July. For a couple reasons we've slowed the ship down. One of things slowing down affords us to do is to work closer with Ken's groups. We're also interested in comments. Some of the things we've heard we thought would be good additions. • Stanley: Can we take a look in terms of a board recommendation? • Jackson: It's been a lot less formal in the initial stages, individuals or entails. Or, if you prefer doing it more formally as a board you can. • Katie: We could discuss via email and come to a board consensus. That could be done before our next meeting. • York: I feel like it's valuable to have a group discussion, it inspires questions. • Byrne: It's an update to an existing plan, it's not from the ground up. • Sunthankar: What affect did the rejection of the tax initiative have? • Jackson: It didn't help. We have many pages of projects and no dedicated funding source. That makes prioritization a difficult process. • Byrne: It goes beyond the scope of what Mark's here to talk about. The land use implications for the Mason Street Corridor going down are significant. • Stanley: I think Nancy York should do a petition drive to put a I/101h sales tax on the ballot for the Mason Street Corridor. • York: Always tell people the costs, they need to know what projects cost. The matching funds were underplayed. • Jackson: We need to work hard to get people to think outside, and envision transit. Transit is a tremendous opportunity to provide capacity to a system. Air Quality Advisory Board May 15, 2003 Page 4 of 5 • Sunthankar: I would like to see this list published in the Coloradoan. It would be nice for people to see this whole thing. • Jackson: Some version of it will make it to the public outreach phase. • Stanley: What's the time frame for recommendations to Council? • Jackson: Council will need recommendations by early September. • York: Would you get us the cost per mile for a four lane, two lane, and one lane, costs for widening, and cost per mile for a new road? • Jackson: I will see what I can do about that. I-25 Subarea Plan, Ken Waido Waido provided a brief back ground of the project and distributed a handout summarizing the key points, conclusions and policies of the I-25 Subarea Plan. • Moore: I hope we have a major activity center to provide a lot of neighborhood services. • Trine: Will you need to improve intersections? • Waido: Mulberry, Prospect and Windsor will need to be funded. • York: Will there be an adequate facilities requirement? • Waido: Yes, new developments will have to meet the land use code. • York: Street oversizing fees take care of streets in the development. The impacts to the intersections haven't been taken into consideration. • Waido: There are several procedural things that grew out of the Walmart process that deal with off -site improvements. • Jackson: The scope of what a development project needs to look at are determined by the traffic engineer. • Jackson: If you have a linkage you can require mitigation. Can't require more of a development than is proportional to their impact. This is an issue cities and communities are dealing with all over the country. • York: I'm a native of Colorado, and this looks like the "californication" of Fort Collins. That's what's happening to Fort Collins, instead of farm land. • Waido: This plan is to keep that from happening. • Moore: I live in a family home built in 1950 in that area. I like the idea of a shopping center. Expansion is going to happen, to plan it is a good idea. • Waido: There will be a parallel road system to minimize the need for people to get on the interstate for short trips. • York: This plan is really auto dependent. We should plan for mass transit. Maybe some of this can be minimized so we don't have to have 4 lanes on the parallel road. Let's figure out how we're going to manufacture hydrogen, and what it's sources will be. We need a longer view. • Trine: Was anything cancelled because of the transportation tax? • Jackson: Some of the developments where there were existing deficiencies can't move forward until the City does? Or they can do it themselves. • York: This plan will reduce air quality standards. • Waido: In my opinion it may help air quality. There will be shorter trips for folks who live in that part of the city. • Stanley: I'm glad you're not expanding the GMA. I personally would like to see redevelopment within our City boundaries. I'm not a fan of the parallel road system. Air Quality Advisory Board May 15, 2003 Page 5 of Nancy York made the following motion: Move that we not approve this because of the parallel road system, congestion on I-25, the detriment to the air quality, and that it will detract form the core of Fort Collins' business. The motion was seconded by Cherie Trine and passed with 3 votes in favor (Nancy York, Linda Stanley and Mandar Sunthankar), 1 opposed (Katie Walters), and 1 member abstaining (Ken Moore). • Stanley: Ken, you might be a good choice to meet with Karen and Ray as a citizen. You have a lot more credibility, and it sounds like you know a lot about the radon issue. • Trine: We should form a subcommittee and put a packet together. I would like to do it, but won't be available till the end of June. Adjourn The meeting was adjourned at 7:40.