Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutNatural Resources Advisory Board - Minutes - 09/15/2004MINUTES CITY OF FORT COLLINS NATURAL RESOURCES ADVISORY BOARD SPECIAL MEETING 281 N. COLLEGE September 15, 2004 For Reference: Nate Donovan, NRAB Chair - 472-1599 Eric Hamrick, Council Liaison - 225-2343 John Stokes, Staff Liaison - 221-6263 Board Members Present Linda Knowlton, Nate Donovan, Randy Fischer, Ryan Staychock, Rob Petterson, Glen Colton, Board Members Absent Gerry Hart, Joann Thomas, Clint Skutchan Staff Present Natural Resources Dent: Terry Klahn, Mark Sears, Margit Hentschel, Crystal Strouse City Manager's Office: Tom Vosburg City Attorney: Carrie Daggett Guests RETEC EDAW XCEL Riverbank Restoration (Brownfields), EDAW (information item) Consultants and staff presented the board with background information and details regarding the cleanup and restoration plans. • Fischer: Will the City have adequate control on what goes on out there and over the restoration? • Sears: We believe so. We've worked closely with RETEC. This has gotten to such a rapid pace that it was beyond our ability to keep up so we hired Walsh. Grant has been at all of the meetings in the last month or so. They asked for our restoration guidelines, and Grant will review the plans. Crystal will be involved, but Grant will be our eyes and ears. From what we've seen so far, they're working with us fairly well. • Donovan: What input have you had into the nature of the license? Is it carte blanche? Can RETEC take what it wants and leave what it wants? • Daggett: We've tried to define the access issues, and incorporated that into the terms of permission we've granted. We will have a written, formally agreed upon restoration plan that will be part of the terms of the license. By the end of October we'll have something we'll be able to really point at. Natural Resources Advisory Board September 15, 2004 Page 2 of 4 • Sears: There's a NWCWD pipe line that will be relocated. We are taking to Council Tuesday night an easement for the relocation of the waterline, and it does cross the Gustav Swanson natural area. Because of the time line we've had to forego getting NRAB approval of that easement. • Donovan: Can it go that way? I'm concerned about notice. I don't know how we can make a recommendation hearing about this at this point in the discussion. • Daggett: Staff will report to the Council in the read before packet what the NRAB reaction was. The intent is to be able to report to the Council the NRAB reaction. From the Natural Areas easement policy, There are references "to the extent possible". It's been very much a last minute. The Council has approved the relocation on the Atzlan center side. • Donovan: How long have you known the water line would be relocated? • Sears: We were not aware this line was going to need to be relocated. • Donovan: When will it be relocated? • Sears: They will wait till the middle of project activity, when the river is diverted and dry. • Donovan: I don't see the urgency to go to Council. • Daggett: Part of the problem is they cant relocate the portion of the water line on the south side of the river until they know they can continue. It's a pretty big deal for the water district. They were planning to do this in five years. They've been very cooperative in trying to adjust their plans so they can get out of the way of the clean UP. • Fischer: This is not acceptable procedure for dealing with easements with this board. The real issue is what the impact of this water line will be. • Sears: They were in there and repaired that line in that very location. They worked with us very well, as well as clean up and restoration after the fact. • Fischer: The fact its an existing easement is a mitigating circumstance. • Donovan: I'm not comfortable making a recommendation. • Knowlton: Just say you brought it to us tonight, but we were unable to make a recommendation because we haven't been briefed on it. • Donovan: It concerns me that that NRD staff just found out about it today, and its on the Council agenda for Tuesday. Conservation Agreement with the US FISH & Wildlife Service, Gale McGaha- Miller, Utilities, • McGaha-Miller: The US Fish & Wildlife service approached us with an offer it seemed unwise to refuse. At Meadow Springs Ranch north of the headquarters there is a sub -irrigated wet meadow. The USF&W has designated a small portion as critical habitat for the Gaura plant. They are proposing an IGA between the City and USF&W for the purpose of protecting the plant. Designating critical habitat does not affect land ownership or place any requirements on the land owners. What they are doing is trying to negotiate a conservation agreement. This agreement would need to be approved by Council, and is tentatively scheduled for October 5, 2004. • Donovan: Will the conservation agreement be done before that? Natural Resources Advisory Board September 15, 2004 Page 3 of 4 • McGaha-Miller: It's a draft now. • Knowlton: We could support the idea even if we haven't seen the actual agreement. I cant imagine that we wouldn't support it. • Fischer: Since the natural areas program doesn't own the land we don't have to make a recommendation. It would have been nice to see the agreement. We might have had input. • Petterson: It might be worth having a copy sent to us. • Donovan: Is it something we could see? • Fischer: Did they propose a conservation easement? • McGaha-Miller: No. • Fischer: Is there a down side to a conservation easement, so the agreement would be in effect in perpetuity? • McGaha-Miller: Right now the downside would be the time element. Also, the culture of this plant is not well known. I'm not sure they know what they want in a conservation easement. The agreement is pretty vague. We're basically going to talk to them about what we do there. • Daggett: In a few years there might be enough information that a conservation easement would be more practical. • Fischer: Are there any conservation easements on Meadow Springs property? • McGaha-Miller: No. Power Line Easement Request, John Stokes • Donovan: The easement agreement shouldn't be silent about access outside of the boundary of the legal description. • Fischer: They're asking for our property. Will we be signing over all of the rights? • Sears: Only the rights to provide electrical service to that location. They will maintain the line. We're asking them to do this. They want a legal document saying its their line. • Pettterson: Can we say that it would be best from our point of view to consult with us about the access. Staff can help determine where it makes the most sense. The risk is they will abuse access rights to this easement. • Sears: No, I don't think there's that risk. They're providing a service . They're not going to do anything without close cooperation. It's not a situation where they have a line to serve someone else. This is a totally different relationship. • Daggett: It's not a question of what we can do legally. The question is policy management. • Petterson: Is it possible to put what you're saying in the agreement? It's a no- brainer from their perspective, but we would feel more comfortable. Petterson made the following motion: Move that we request that the standard easement form they give us be amended to include the requirement that they consult us when they need access so that we can prevent damage to the natural area. And, with that proviso, we recommend approval of the easement request. Natural Resources Advisory Board September 15, 2004 Page 4 of 4 Randy Fischer seconded the motion. The motion was passed unanimously. Adjourn The meeting was adjourned at 8:30 p.m. Submitted by Terry Mahn Admin Support Supervisor