Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutAir Quality Advisory Board - Minutes - 09/25/2001O\-o`i- U-] MINUTES CITY OF FORT COLLINS AIR QUALITY ADVISORY BOARD REGULAR MEETING 281 N. COLLEGE AVE. September 25, 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, Linda Stanley, Harry Edwards, Mandar Sunthankar Board Members Absent Jim Dennison Staff Present Natural Resources Department Brian Woodruff, Terry Klahn Advance Planning: Ken Waido, Joe Frank Transportation Planning: Mark Jackson Guests Steve Dean, Citizen The meeting was called to order at 4:40 I-25 Subarea Plan, Ken Waido Waido said that on October 16, City Council will be providing direction on if the subarea plan should be developed with an expansion to the Growth Management Area. It's not a simple decision. We will also be looking for any land use direction they might want to give us. Waido provided an overview of both subarea options. Discussion • Schroeer: Why wouldn't we want to expand the GMA? A lot ofpeople believe the community should define itself in terms of permanent boundaries, and that the existing GMA should be put in concrete. We believe the GMA boundary discussion needs to be in a different forum. • Stanley: I agree that the GMA discussions should be looked at with City Plan. You mention transit as part of this plan, but there are no funding mechanisms. Right now we're seeing transit being cut. It seems obvious the roads will be built, but what about transit? There is no one answer as to how to deal with things like increasing mass transit. That will be a financial decision that the City or Council makes. And, it depends on how you define supporting transit. • Stanley: There are no roads that aren't subsidized. Our analysis regarding road improvements is the development within the study area will generate sufficient street oversizing fees to cover new roads and the associated costs, except for the interstate interchange improvements. Au Quality Advisory Board September 25, 2001 Page 2 of 5 • Stanely: What about the 'h cent sales tax on the ballot in 2001 to fund the road systems of the I-25 corridor. There are many things being discussed as options to raise revenues for the improvements; sales tax, improvement districts, and the rural transportation authority. • Levine: Some areas need improvements more than others. Some communities benefit, while some bear the brunt of the tax. It's a question of many hundreds of millions of dollars. • Stanley: When you talk about the cost of road building, does it include rights of way? We rarely have to purchase right of way. It's dedication is a function of development approval. When we get a master street plan updated and approved, any development would be required to dedicate the right of way. • Jackson: The City and County, and the City of Loveland have an IGA to share street standards. • York: The County has already approved the road expansions, and the upgrading of the roads. They've already made those changes on their master road plan. • Levine: Where will the funding come from? • York: If Amendment 4 would have passed the development on I-25 couldn't take place. • Woodruff: I'm trying to put things into an air quality context. How do you think the subarea would affect the air quality picture? Which way do you think is the right decision from a VMT growth perspective? From a planning perspective, the plan that increases the GMA puts more people in closer proximity to jobs and employment. We go back to what we're trying to achieve, providing the opportunity to live, work and shop in your own neighborhood. That option appears to create a better "market "for transit. I'm not a VMT or air quality expert. • Jackson: In a regional context, there are similarities in themes. What we're looking at isn't unique to Fort Collins. It's common throughout the I-25 Corridor Plan. You have at least the same vision in the I-25 Regional Plan, as you do in the subarea plan. The notion of increasing VMT is the hot topic throughout the nation right now. • Sunthankar: What is the projected population based on your density? The first option is ten to eleven thousand, the second option is six to seven thousand. • York: What about the regional shopping center, who do you see going to that? Everyone in the region. • York: Do you not perceive that as a magnet for VMT? It will be a traffic attractor. • Stanley: If I don't support the I-25 Regional Plan, why would I support the subarea plan? I wonder about the regional road system. If we have the subarea plan, we'll have auto dependant sprawl. We still have room to expand in Fort Collins. • Stanley: So, October 16 is not for adoption of the subarea plan, but direction on the boundary? That's 90% of it. • Edwards: We have three options. We can recommend expanding the GMA, support the existing GMA, which is the staff recommendation, or, we can remain silent. • Levine: Glen Coulton's handout, and the NRAB comments that were included in the packet are excellent. The air quality impact had not been done at that time. We have a Lutraq process to look at land use and air quality. Did you keep a log of comments at the open house? The open house wasn't designed to solicit comments, it was to provide information. • Levine: What did the comments basically say? Most of the comments were opposed to growth and development. Air Quality Advisory Board September 25, 2001 Page 3 of 5 Stanley: Let's suppose there's no concept of a parallel road system in the regional plan, would you still have it in your subarea plan? Yes, we would have looked at upgrading facilities. Stanley: I really want to like your plan, but I don't. I can't support either one of these subarea plans. They go against City Plan. You're putting limited resources further out, when we already don't have enough to go around in the core city area. A lot of focus will go out to the I-25 corridor area. There's a link between that and the air quality. We have these large retail centers planned, that cause people to travel further. Our resources will not go to transit, they will go to the roads. Linda Stanley made the following motion: The Air Quality Advisory Board recommends to Council that neither subarea plan is acceptable, that both plans contribute to an auto dependant type of sprawl that is contrary to City Plan, and that we need to concentrate our resources within the currently developed portions of the City. • York: This plan will economically hurt Fort Collins. • Sunthankar: I don't agree with that. • York: The air quality along I-25 is going to be unhealthy to those working there if either of these plans are accepted. The regional shopping center will necessitate improvements to the Prospect Road interchange, and that's an unnecessary expense in my opinion. • Sunthankar: I don't support the motion. I don't know if the air quality is going to go either way. I have no objection to growth plans as long as the air quality remains the same. I'm tired of going to Harmony and S. College for shopping. Isn't it better to have someplace that's faster and quicker. I don't think we have thought about these plans properly in terms of air quality and VMT. • Edwards: From a technical point of view, I don't believe either plan has an advantage in the air quality analysis. • York: I was bom and raised in this area. My vision is inner city transit, moving people by rail and bus. It's more economical than widening and repaving roads. From a quality of health it would be far better if the land was left as agricultural. I am in support of the motion. • Levine: From the perspective of someone who has lived here for 22 years, the only place for rural area is to the east. The motion passed with three votes in favor, one vote opposed, and two members abstaining. John Schroeer made the following statement. "I don't see where either plan is going to make a significant difference in VMT or growth, and would like to support staff s recommendation." Mandar Sunthankar said he agrees with Schroeer's statement. Minutes With the following changes, the minutes of the August 28, 2001 meeting were approved: Page 4, middle of the page; Change "hi emitter" to Colorado State AIR program. Review Action Log The action log was not reviewed. Air Quality Advisory Board September 25, 2001 Page 4 of 5 I-25 Corridor Plan, Joe Frank Frank said the Regional I-25 Corridor Plan was scheduled for Council review on August 14, but was pulled from the agenda so Council would have more time to review the plan. Council asked staff to review the plan and try to identify parts of the plan that could be deleted. Right now the plan is to gather comments regarding the deletions, and share those comments with Council on October 23. We went to the Transportation Board last week, to the NRAB next week and P&Z the following week. Discussion • Levine: Have you had any input from the Transportation Board? • Woodruff: I talked to Cynthia Scott and she said a motion was recorded that Council not support the plan. That has nothing to do with the deletions. • Woodruff: The areas they would like to see worked on are right of way, design standards, open space, and community separators. • Edwards: Is there an air quality component to this document? There was an air quality study as part of the plan, there is not an air quality component in this document. You guys have taken your action on the plan. We're focusing in on specifics here. Ifyou want io make comments, you certainly can. If you don't want to, you don't have to. • Stanley: For me, the deletions don't get rid of the reasons why I oppose the plan. They don't make me feel any better. I don't see any changes to the road system. Taking out funding doesn't deal with the funding questions. I would just prefer to see our recommendation from two months ago stand with out any changes. • Levine: I agree with Linda. Some of what has been removed is minor, but good. I am glad the funding mechanism is out, although I did want the transportation impact fees. I'm glad to see the rebates removed, they were objectionable to a lot of folks, including the head transportation planner for the City. I don't know where this stands with no mention of funding. It was a laundry list of potential funding to be used. It was never intended as a policy statement. • Levine: What happened is staff looked at a plan that would be acceptable to Johnstown and Windsor, and maybe missed the boat. It has to be acceptable to us and City Plan too. • Stanley: Joe's looking for input on the deletions. Those deletions don't have any affect on how I feel about the plan. • Levine: There are substantial short falls. Before we bail anyone out we should establish who is responsible to make sure it won't happen again. It needs to be approached as fair as possible. • Frank: Maybe you should have the MPO come in and do a presentation, and look at the regional transportation system. • Stanley: What if we say that although troubling words and phrases have been deleted, the plan remains the same, and therefore we stand by our original recommendation. • Edwards: Do the deletions have any impact on air quality? No. • Edwards: Then I suggest that no action on our part is necessary. Harry Edwards made the following motion: Since the deletions have no affect on air quality, no further action on the part of this board is required, and we stand by our previous recommendation. Air Quality Advisory Board September 25, 2001 Page 5 of 5 The motion passed unanimously. Adjournment The meeting adjourned at 7:10 p.m. ACTION LIST — from September 2001 meetinu 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. Draft letter on the CO redesignation, and Brian September circulate via e-mail for comment.