HomeMy WebLinkAboutWater Board - Minutes - 03/25/1999WATER BOARD MINUTES
March 25, 1999
3:10 - 5:07 p.m.
Fort Collins Utilities Training Room
700 Wood Street
COUNCIL LIAISON
Chuck Wanner (Present)
WATER BOARD CHAIRMAN
Paul Clopper - 223-5556
STAFF LIAISON
Molly Nortier - 221-6681
MEMBERS PRESENT
Paul Clopper, Chair; Tom Sanders, Vice Chair; Alison Adams, Robert Ward, David Lauer, George
Reed, Tom Brown, John Morris, Dave Frick, Dave Rau, Joe Bergquist
STAFF
Mike Smith, Dave Agee, Dennis Bodes, Jim Hibbard, Bob Smith, Roger Buffington, Susan Hayes,
Dennis Sumner, Heather Hoxeng, Molly Nortier
GUEST
Gene Schleiger
Chairman Paul Clopper opened the meeting. The Following items were discussed:
MINUTES
Joe Bergquist moved that the minutes of February 25, 1999 be approved as distributed. After a
second from George Reed, the board voted unanimously to approve the motion.
UPDATE: NORTHERN COLORADO WATER CONSERVANCY DISTRICT
Gene Schleiger handed out the NRCS SNOTEL precipitation update and the NCWCD Big
Thompson Project report. As of March 25d' about 1 percentage point per day is being lost in the
snowpack with a loss of 8-9% in the last ten days on the upper Colorado which is running at about
77%. The South Platte is 81%. "We are better off than the southern part of the state. The upper Rio
Grande, the Dolores and San Juan are in the mid -sixties and fifties," he said.
Water Board Minutes
March 25, 1999
Page 2
The District is monitoring the storage every day. "It's changing as to where the storage is and how
much we can bring over." Last month Mr. Schleiger reported about the problems they were having
with the unit 3 pump being out at Flatiron. "That put us about 30 days behind in bringing water over
to put in Carter and Horsetooth. What we have been seeing the last week is probably one of the
poorest scenarios we could have hoped for," he said. "We are starting to see the low and mid basin
snow beginning to melt quite rapidly. What that means is we've got the tunnel coming from the west
side over here totally full, but we are probably not going to be able to bring water over here as fast
as it's coming in over there, and that raises the chance that we are going to spill some water. We are
trying everything we can not to. Willow Creek Reservoir is coming up and we are within two feet of
being full." The plan now is to begin pumping from Willow Creek into Granby the first part of April.
"That's a rather iffy proposition. If it is pumped up and it is spilled, there are costs involved in the
pumping that you are letting go down the river. On the other hand, when you consider the dry
conditions, that's a gamble we are going to have to take by turning the pumps on and hoping to
capture everything without the spill."
The same thing is happening with Windy Gap, he continued. "I think our feeling is that, if the
snowpack would come out normal and a little slower, there would be an opportunity to pump some
Windy Gap water. There still may be; it just depends on how things change on a day to day basis.
When we get into Windy Gap, because of the cost of turning the pumps on, we have to be almost
certain that we can pump at least 10,000 ac-ft before turning them on."
He said they are watching this every day trying to adjust operational plans, but the delay with Unit
3 has really put them in a bind with the early snow melt coming.
He pointed out on the graphs that they are moving most of the water into Carter Lake now. "We are
still trying to work with the contractors on Horsetooth," he said, "although they are starting to wrap
up. We are within 28,000 ac-ft of having Carter Lake full, and Horsetooth is within 60,000. We
anticipate having them filled by the first part of June."
He announced that there will be a NCWCD Spring Water Users meeting on Wednesday, April 7°i at
the Raintree Inn in Longmont. Board members are welcome to come. He also announced the dates
for the annual summer bus tours of the east and west slopes. The west slope dates are June 17' and
July 21", and the east slope dates are July 15m and August 18s. Anyone interested in going can call
the District office. "As usual, they are filling up within 2-3 days," he said.
Regarding the graphs on Carter Lake, etc, George Reed asked if those elevations are really for 1998
or is that an error? "That's an error and we'll get that changed," Mr. Schleiger said.
"If we don't have much more snow in the mountains, how are things going to look for this summer?"
Tom Sanders asked. "Our reservoir storage looks very good, but for people who depend largely on
Water Board Minutes
March 25, 1999
Page 3
direct flows, that could be a different story. However, I haven't seen our flow projections for about
two weeks," Mr. Schleiger replied. "About two weeks ago we were still looking at mid 90% of what
our anticipation was for direct stream flow. That may have gone down a bit over the last two weeks.
We feel that we can get almost everybody through the year fairly well. The question becomes, what
happens if we get two or three of these years back to back."
"Is the leakage study on Horsetooth Dam constraining the water levels this year?" Mr. Clopper asked.
"No," Mr. Schleiger replied. "We have purposely moved the water south to Carter Lake to allow the
studies to go on at Horsetooth, and keep the head pressure minimal while they are working. They are
at the point now that we can bring it up to full storage."
"Is the reason that you are worried about the spill because of the capacity of the pipe coming
through?" Mr. Lauer asked. "Right; we are limited to 550 cfs coming through the Adams Tunnel,"
Mr. Schleiger answered. "Since Unit 3 came up, we have been running it at maximum capacity. We
will continue to run it at maximum capacity until both Carter and Horsetooth are full. We currently
have 95,000 ac-ft of capacity remaining at Lake Granby. If the runoff continues to come in at this
rate, and we would get up to its normal 2,025 cfs, we are still only able to bring 550 through the
tunnel, so it starts stacking up faster than we can move it," he explained.
UPDATE: NORTH TAFT HILL OUT -OF -CITY SERVICE REOUEST
Paul Clopper explained that this item was on the agenda for the February meeting. The Board had
a number of questions and concerns about this proposal which has already been approved by the
County. The Water Utility received a request for sanitary sewer service for a proposed RV
campground located east of Taft Hill Road and north of Lafarge (formerly Western Mobile) gravel
operation. City Code requires that out -of -city service requests for developments other than
single family, be taken to Water Board for a recommendation to the Utilities General Manager.
Some of the Board's concerns were cost of the service, encouragement of development in that area
and the fact that the RV park would be located in a 100-year floodplain. After considerable
discussion, the Board voted 8-1 (an abstention) to provide sewer service for the development with
the condition that the sewer line be protected from a 100-year flood.
Tim Hibbard reported that the Conservation and Public Education Committee met prior to the Board
meeting. They primarily discussed some of the process issues involved when the County approves
a plan and the applicant comes to the Water Board for out -of -city service. City Code requires that
the requests be reviewed by the Water and P&Z Boards. "This doesn't happen very often but in this
instance it brought up some issues around process." Historically the Water Board has not viewed
these requests from a land use perspective; therefore the P&Z Board has had that role. This request
is somewhat unusual because it's outside of the Urban Growth Area (UGA).
Water Board Minutes
March 25, 1999
Page 4
Since the Water Board and Storm Drainage Board were combined, the Water Board now has flood
control responsibilities which puts a new spin on the request. "So here we are looking at a land use
that has been approved in the County by their flood control staff. When it comes to the Water Board
there may be some questions about the adequacy of that. The Conservation & Public Education
Committee talked about whether or not, in the future, the Board wanted to have County staff at the
meeting to answer questions the Board might have about floodplain issues."
Mr. Hibbard continued by saying that there also seemed to be a disconnect between what happened
in the Water Board and what happened in the P&Z Board. The Water Board tried to separate the
floodplain issues from the wastewater issues. "When it came before the P&Z Board, they wanted to
talk about floodplain issues." He reiterated that there are a lot of process issues that seem muddy in
that regard.
AP&Z Board member recently called Mr. Clopper. "She was interested in finding out what we talked
about and why we voted the way we did, which was to recommend that service be provided. By the
way," he said, "I just learned the other day that, at last week's P&Z Board meeting, they
recommended to deny service." The question that Mike Smith and Mr. Clopper discussed after Mr.
Clopper received the phone call, was "we have a cart and a horse and the horse should really come
first. Had it been inside the City limits the Water Board would have had a variance hearing, but since
it was outside of the City limits and outside the UGA, it was not within our jurisdiction. The horse
that should have come before the cart that Mike Smith and I discussed was the land use question. If
indeed it is found to be a compatible land use for this site, and is recommended as such, then the issue
of supplying wastewater service seemed to come to us in a logical sequence of the way to take these
requests. That's not what happened."
Alison Adams said the County approved it and came to us for service. "Then our P&Z Board
recommended it be denied," Mr. Clopper added. "Can the P&Z Board override the Water Board's
decision?" Ms. Adams asked. "That's what we discussed at the Committee meeting," Mr. Clopper
stated. "What's the area of jurisdiction and what things do we look at? It seemed that the P&Z Board
was looking at certain issues that they thought we should have looked at and didn't." "So what is the
relationship there?" Ms. Adams asked. "What's our P&Z Board doing looking at land use that is
approved in the County?" Dave Rau wondered.
Mike Smith said the P&Z Board only recommends, as does the Water Board. "They have no
authority to approve or deny an out -of -city service request." "Why do they even get involved?" Mr.
Rau asked. "As I recall, some time ago it was thought that if something like this was outside the City
limits, and inside the UGA then there is a process for them to be involved," Mr. Smith said. "The
current City Code calls for out -of -city service requests that come to the Utility, other than single
family homes, or other than areas we have historically served, such as LaPorte
L
E
Water Board Minutes
March 25, 1999
Page 5
Sanitation District, to be brought to the Water Board and the P&Z Board," Mr. Hibbard explained.
"It happens so infrequently that, in the past, nobody has ever made the effort to state that it may be
time to change the City Code. My personal opinion is that it may have been a holdover from the 60s
when the City `fathers' wanted to use utility service as a club in shaping the growth of the City.
Because of that, we now have the Fort Collins -Loveland Water District, the South Fort Collins
Sanitation District, ELCO, etc. Historically it shows that you need to make the decisions on land use
perspectives and then talk about utilities." The other observation he made was that he has seen the
P&Z Board discuss floodplain issues like they were land use issues. "So that is their normal mode,
e.g. the Wal-mart development.
Ms. Adams stressed again that they don't have jurisdiction over it either because it's a County issue.
"Aren't areas within the UGA, but not within the City limits, referred to City Planning?" Mike Smith
asked. "This project was also referred to City Planning even though it was outside the UGA," Roger
Buffington responded. If it's inside the UGA, the County normally refers it to City P&Z and they act
on it, because it will eventually be part of the City," Mike Smith stated. "In this case, and it doesn't
happen very often, we have a City request outside the UGA," he acknowledged.
"Did that happen because this is a special case where the site itself borders on the UGAT' David
Lauer asked. "It might be," Mr. Smith replied. "The City Planning staff commented on it, but it didn't
get referred to the P&Z Board as a planning issue because it wasn't inside the UGA."
"That's the same way the Utilities' staff commented on it, but it didn't get referred to the Water
Board prior to the County making a decision," Alison Adams observed. "Not until the request for
service came in," Mr. Smith responded. "It makes sense that someone needs to approve the land use
before if they want wastewater service from us."
Paul Clopper said that Mike Smith has the ultimate decision to provide out -of -city service. One board
is saying go ahead and another board recommends denying service. "It wasn't a problem for me," Mr.
Smith said. "Philosophically we need to make a decision on how we look at things. We are not a land
use board," Mr. Rau stated. "We need to look at it from a technical water, wastewater and drainage
perspective, and not make it a political football. If we have the capacity and it meets our requirements
and we make some money to help pay for the plan, we can make the decision to provide service," he
concluded. An issue the Board discussed last meeting was, "if we said no and they develop with
septic tanks, then we would be concerned about water quality," Mr. Smith pointed out.
"Wasn't their approval contingent on getting city service?" Susan Hayes asked. "The County Health
Dept. felt strongly that that was necessary, but it wasn't one of the conditions," Mr. Buffington said.
"So does the County approve how they were going to get water and wastewater?" Robert Ward
asked. "We aren't serving them water," Mr. Hibbard pointed out. "In approving that use, what
provision did they make for wastewater?" Mr. Ward reiterated. "I understand that they approved it
Water Board Minutes
March 25, 1999
Page 6
on the condition that they would come to us for service," W. Buffington said. "The developer
presented to the County that he was going to be pursuing service from the City," Mr. Buffington
stated. "And the County approved it not knowing if they were going to have service?" Mr. Ward
continued. "Yes," W. Buffington replied. Alison Adams said it was her understanding that they
weren't required to come to us and our concern was that they would put in septic tanks.
"On the issue of septic tanks, did P&Z Board members Sally Crane discuss with staffwhat the option
was for being able to install a septic system if they weren't going to be on City sewer?" Mr. Lauer
asked. "No, her comment to me was that P&Z Board members felt that the septic tank `boggy man'
in their view was raised as an argument to further push them into making a recommendation to supply
wastewater service," Mr. Clopper related. "Those kinds of comments would get my hair up," Ms.
Adams asserted. "That's why, when I get those kinds of phone calls, they get my attention," Mr.
Clopper responded.
"Did their deliberation and recommendation provide any new information that is relevant to our
decision?" Tom Brown asked. "To my knowledge, no," Mr. Clopper replied, "but I haven't received
any feedback since they had their meeting, which was a week ago." Roger Buffington was at the
meeting. He said he wasn't sure the City Planning staff had reviewed this when the County referred
it to the P&Z Board. "Initially they objected to the project when some of the planning staff went to
the site with the applicant. They went through their concerns, and apparently the applicant
adequately addressed them. They submitted a second letter to the County withdrawing their
objections to the project," Mr. Buffington explained. He continued by saying that recently, when this
was coming up to the P&Z Board, planning staff started reviewing it again, looking at it from the
standpoint of City Plan which was adopted somewhere midstream of when this project first was
submitted to the County. "There is a policy in City Plan that reads: "New roads and other City
services should not be extended to serve development that is inconsistent with City Plan or other
regional plans that are adopted by the City." "Within City Plan there is a structure plan map which
extends beyond City limits and actually beyond UGA and it shows this area as open space. The P&Z
Board felt that the proposed campground was inconsistent with the structure plan," Mr. Buffington
said, "so that was half of the basis for their concerns." "So it sounds like each group has taken a
position based on the framework that it operates under, which presents a complete conflict," Mr.
Ward contends.
Mr. Clopper pointed out that the Board will not be taking any formal action on this. He just wanted
to bring it as an FYI to the Board. He asked Mike Smith what would be a reasonable way to proceed
with this. "It seems to me you and your staff and your counterparts in planning could discuss the fact
that this issue came up, and perhaps determine if there is a better way to proceed." "We'll look at it
in terms of the process and meanwhile we will handle this issue which probably will stir some further
discussion," Mr. Smith responded.
Water Board Minutes
March 25, 1999
Page 7
"At the last meeting we discussed this project being built in the floodplain. It was pointed out that
these would be RVs and the rules do not allow them to remain on the premises year around," Tom
Sanders recalled. "What happens if there is a change after a few years and they want to build
permanent structures there, e.g. a trailer park? Then we have another big problem there even if it's
out of our jurisdiction." "In order for that to happen, it would have to come under review by the
County if it was done legally in accordance with all the regulations," Mr. Buffington replied.
"What if they say, `we already have sewer service, so the City has more or less approved some sort
of development there,"' Dr. Sanders asserted. "Again that would come down to the land use versus
utilities," Mr. Hibbard replied. "I'm talking about the stormwater part of this now," Dr. Sanders
responded. "We haven't approved permanent structures year around or anything of that kind," Ms.
Adams pointed out. "It seems to me it's an issue of what is the difference between County and City
regulations," she added. "If their RVs float down the River and plug up the bridge over College Ave.,
it would become our problem rather quickly," Mr. Clopper said. Ms. Adams also pointed out that she
doesn't know if there is much compatibility in what the County wants to do in terms of urbanizing
the County with respect to what the City wants to do. "We have been reading a lot in the newspapers
recently about the conflicts relating to the County Land Use Plan. It seems to me there is the potential
for conflicts all the time," she emphasized.
REVIEW OF 1999 WATER BOARD WORK PLAN
Paul Clopper explained that he and Vice Chair Tom Sanders thought it would be worthwhile for the
chair of each of the standing committees to take 5 or 10 minutes to reflect on the work items they see
coming up within the framework of the 1999 work plan which the Board approved in November.
Water Supply Committee
Tom Brown talked about the last joint meeting with the Liaison Issues Committee at which staff
presented some interesting results of an analysis which he and Alison Adams summarized sometime
after that meeting. "If we had more time we would have presented that to the Water Board today,"
he said, "but it sounds as if we would be better off to do that when we have at least a half hour."
"What we were looking for were the two or three top items or themes on which you, as chair of your
committee, think you would be spending some time in 1999," Mr. Clopper clarified.
"The primary issue is related to this Water Supply Policy report and the associated analysis which
staff presented in January," Mr. Brown began. "The analysis takes a look at the projected water
demands for treated water in the City's service area, and the larger growth area, and compares that
with the available supply. It then takes a look at what that means for future storage needs. The basic
conclusion ofit, as was reported in the meeting, was that the crunch is not in availability, but in water
storage, and the ability to deliver the water we have rights for. However, with the new pipeline, and
with small additions to storage that could come about with the gravel pits, that were discussed at the
last meeting, the City would be able to meet its demands in its service area, without additional storage
Water Board Minutes
March 25, 1999
Page 8
or additional water," he explained. He went on to say that we are assuming that developers will turn
in water or cash -in -lieu -of as planned, but essentially, the results say that the policy of that raw water
requirement, along with some storage and the new pipeline, are enough. They concluded that the City
has planned well and can meet its obligations with just those additional changes.
That raises the question of Halligan Reservoir on which the City is maintaining an option each year.
"The analysis shows that the City of Fort Collins itself, at least if it's using the 1-in-50 criterion for
drought, probably won't need Halligan to meet treated water demands, but that other areas around
the City that are developing, are very likely to need Halligan or some other source of storage. That
points to regional cooperation if some larger storage option is exercised, like the Halligan project.
We didn't go into what it means in terms of this option and whether should we be getting other
people to share in the cost of maintaining the option etc. What sort of regional cooperation should
we actually be pursuing here? In mulling over the results of the analysis and also doing some
additional analyses, such as looking at the 1-in-100 instead of the 1-in-50 policy, we will see how
sensitive the results are to that particular part of the analysis."
"What is your planning horizon for that analysis?" Mr. Clopper asked. "It is the year 2040," Mr.
Brown replied. "It's a major issue and it is certainly something that will eventually be brought in more
detail to the full board. It's a big decision that the City is going to have to face at some point," he
stressed.
Mr. Clopper asked if Board members had other questions or comments. "It is your opinion that
Halligan will not be needed for future growth in Fort Collins; is it only outside the City that it will be
needed?" Dr. Sanders wondered. "Outside of our current service area," Mr. Brown replied. "Is this
given that there would be storage somewhere besides the gravel pits, which I don't think is that
much?" Dr. Sanders continued. "I think some storage is necessary," Dennis Bode said, "whether it
is in Halligan or gravel pits. It's borderline whether you might need a portion of it or the whole
thing." "If this is in fact the case, perhaps we should ask other entities to help pay the annual fee to
retain the right to first access in Halligan," Dr. Sanders proposed. He also wondered how much that
fee is. Mr. Bode said the fees have increased through the years. If is isn't needed for our future,
maybe we should reassess our interest in it," Dr. Sanders suggested. "One thing I heard is that it's
not needed for projected growth through 2040," Mr. Rau said. "Yes, that's the end ofthe analysis,"
Mr. Brown confirmed.
Mr. Clopper recalled that a few years ago, the Board spent considerable time discussing habitat flows
and aesthetic recreational flows through town. "Do you think your committee is going to get involved
in those topics this year?' "That depends largely on if staff gets the time to move on to other parts
of the reworking of the Water Supply Policy," Mr. Brown responded. "What we are talking about
here is the first step in several as we look at the Water Supply Policy. It's certainly on the list, but
right now it is not actively being looked at. Without staff input on the technical aspects of it, the
L
Water Board Minutes
March 25, 1999
Page 9
committee isn't able to do a whole lot," he said. Mr. Bode said that it depends on the amount of detail
that would be required. "I would expect to get into it enough to start discussing those topics and
determine what the goals and strategies are without so much detailed analysis. Certainly if we need
supplies to meet some of those other objectives, then it's a whole new ball game. We would want to
know what supplies we would use and what kinds of strategies we would use to get there." he
concluded.
Robert Ward was interested in what the Colorado Water Quality Control Commission is going to do
to implement or address the Total Maximum Daily Load (TMDL) concept. "I'm hearing that a
quantity of water may become a water quality consideration. If that happens in the west, that throws
the quality and quantity together. He explained that TMDL is implementation of Section 303D ofthe
Clean Water Act. "There have been a number of law suits that have been filed in about 26+ states and
the courts apparently are ruling that the way EPA has been interpreting that section and implementing
it, is not right, if I understand this correctly. It looks like the courts are re -interpreting that section."
"Different states and different courts interpret it differently," Mr. Bergquist added. "It is bringing a
whole new re-examination of how we write discharge permits and it is bringing into consideration
non -point source pollution which gets at our stormwater runoff quality, and if it continues, it will also
force us to move in the direction of using flow as a water quality variable. Suddenly it forces us to
rate water supply as being under the 303D Clean Water Act which is a mixture of state and federal
laws. That is what Colorado has been trying to avoid, but may not be able to. "I think they are getting
ready to take it to court in Colorado," Mr. Bergquist said. "Perhaps to be clarified as to what the
intent is." Mr. Ward surmised.
Mr. Rau asked Mr. Ward to clarify the quantity and quality interpretation. "To meet your water
quality standard, you must have a certain amount of dilution water, and a certain amount of water
would normally be in that stream at a certain time of year. If the users are abstracting out lots of the
water, forcing the flow down where the concentrations are getting higher and you're violating your
standards, then the quantity of the water is treated, as I understand it, as a potential water quality
variable," Mr. Ward explained. "If I understand you right," Mr. Rau continued, "there are certain
assumptions made and one of the issues is minimum flow. If the stream is below that, as part of your
permit, you would have to figure out a way to maintain that or reduce your discharge. "It is
completely reinterpreted now, and I'm not sure I understand it," Mr. Ward answered. "When I get
permits, there is an assumption made; there is a low flow, and all the calculations are done based on
that historic low flow, and the data is available. Obviously that's subject to change as diversions are
made and water is issued differently," Mr. Rau stated. "Years ago the water quantity people talked
to the water quality people saying dilution is not the solution to pollution," Mike Smith pointed out.
"The water quantity people basically were right. In the Colorado Supreme Court, water rights were
not inhibited because of water quality issues necessarily, but there are some catches to that," he
acknowledged. "When we are dealing with our permits on the wastewater side, they had the old Q710
and sometimes our discharge is the stream; and those are the worst cases," he related. "It's going
Water Board Minutes
March 25, 1999
Page 10
back to water quality based pollution control, and if you do that, the whole issue of water volume
comes into play," Dr. Sanders remarked. "In the next ten years it will probably eventually bring the
two together in one of these court cases," he predicted. "That brings the implication back to water
supply," Mr. Ward concluded.
Conservation and Public Education
David Lauer began by saying there are five items on their list. The Committee has been meeting once
a month on each of these topics:
• Monitor the mandatory metering program.
• Help promote public education projects.
• Promote awareness of stormwater quality and flood hazards.
• Help promote integration of stormwater management with community issues and needs.
• Review procedures for informing citizens about the quality of their drinking water.
"Of those five, I see monitoring the metering program as an important piece," he said, "because we
have to keep our meter installation quota up." He mentioned that the Utility is going to employ
another crew and double the City's installation production in the summer.
"The third item, `promote awareness of stormwater quality and flood hazards,' as a result of the
Flood of 1997, and the ongoing Floodplain Task Force, will be priorities in the next 18 months. We
will be debating whether or not there should be any kind of new development in the 100-year
floodplain. If it is decided that we want to restrict new development in the floodplain, we will need
to determine what kinds of policies and procedures will be required to go about doing that. He
acknowledged it will be a contentious issue.
The third priority item is to "help promote integration of stormwater management with community
issues and needs." Bob Smith and other Stormwater staff will be addressing this issue at the April
committee meeting.
He is thinking, instead of having a fifth meeting and continuing the series, he would like to combine,
"review procedures for informing citizens about the quality of their drinking water," with something
else because that seems to be something staff has a good handle on already.
Mr. Clopper reminded the Board that he, David Lauer and Joe Bergquist serve on the Floodplain
Task Force, and staff members Bob Smith and Susan Hayes are there also. Mr. Lauer said he
represents Friends of the Poudre organization on the task force and not the Water Board.
Tom Sanders asked what the C&PE Committee is doing about the problem with household sprinkler
systems and having them checked for cross connection. "That hasn't come up, but it may be
Water Board Minutes
March 25, 1999
Page 11
something we ought to be considering," Mr. Lauer said. Mr. Clopper pointed out that the cross
connection issue was part of the Engineering Committee discussion a few years ago. "I think this
should be part of public education," Mr. Sanders said. "Sprinkler systems need to be inspected
annually," Ms. Adams said. Jim Hibbard said the employees in charge of the cross connection
program continue to work on the program. They go out and test and inspect all new sprinklers
systems. They then enter it into a data base. "For about the first two or three years of the program
we have required annual testing. As the data base has grown from 300 to more than 5,000, two things
have happened, the ability of staff to be able to track all of that is beginning to be taxed, and the
public outcry we hear about `big brother's' intrusion into citizens' daily lives has also grown.
Currently there is a staff committee that is looking into the issue of the annual re -test of single family
resident back flow prevention devices. What we have found is we were hurling down the road
towards a brick wall. We can't continue to do the things we have been doing without making some
changes. Whether that means adding staff to be able to deal with it, increasing our public education
effort, going to every other year or every 5' year in terms of the testing; those are some options being
considered," he explained.
Mr. Sanders said if he has his sprinkler tested it costs about $40. "That's a lot of money every year,"
he contends, "but I think it is an issue we should think about. It may not be something that has to be
certified every year, but it should be some kind of manageable program," he concluded.
Robert Ward asked if there are plans to inform our customers about the quality of their drinking
water. "I wonder what the public's reaction will be when they receive that information." "We will ask
Gale McGaha Miller what she has in mind for that," Mike Smith said. "Just before that is sent out,
it would be nice to have a presentation to explain how it's going to work." Mr. Ward suggested.
Alison Adams related that, because of the warm, dry spring, people in her neighborhood have begun
to water their lawns between noon and 3:00 p.m. during the hottest part of the day when the wind
is blowing. "Have you had any thoughts about putting out some public education on proper irrigation
practices for homeowners?" she asked. Staff prepares lawn watering tips for the
Coloradoan, Mr. Clopper recalled. "Maybe we should start pushing them a little earlier," Ms. Adams
proposed. Mr. Lauer suggested a Utilities bill stuffer. Staff assured the Board that they will be
providing conservation tips through various means.
Legislative and Finance
Robert Ward began by saying his committee hadn't met for awhile. He said that the first item on the
list, "review and make recommendations on Water, Wastewater and Stormwater related legislation
and policies" is something the Committee does each year when the legislature is in session, "but we
haven't done anything this year," he added. The second item, "Review Utilities proposed budget, and
make recommendations regarding Water, Stormwater and Wastewater rate increases, Water and W W
Plant Investment Fees (PIFs), and Stormwater Basin Fees," has been done fairly extensively this past
Water Board Minutes
March 25, 1999
Page 12
year. "Continue to develop Poudre River Drainageway Plan -Funding policies and implementation,"
the third item, has not been discussed recently since the Committee has not met for some time. "There
hasn't been anything of importance in the water area being discussed at the legislature this year," Mr.
Ward related.
Engineering
The items are:
• Review NCWCD Regional Water Demand Study.
• Review planning and designing phases of construction projects as needed.
• Review Water Treatment, Stormwater and Wastewater Treatment Master Plans.
• Review engineering aspect of Halligan Project
• Review design criteria.
• Review Dry Creek Floodplain Project.
Chair Tom Sanders does not recall reviewing design criteria for a number of years other than with
the Stormwater Utility. "I thinks it is time we were looking at that again." Regarding reviewing the
engineering aspects of Halligan, we did that about 7 or 8 years ago when we were looking at the
feasible alternatives, and that's been on hold for a few years. "If it looks like we may not be needing
Halligan, I think it's premature to even be looking at engineering designs," he said. "Is Seaman
Reservoir one that we might want to be looking at?" he asked. "Potentially," Mr. Smith replied. Dr.
Sanders asked Mike Smith to let him know when that happens. Mr. Smith related that Greeley has
made a number of improvements there.
Dr. Sanders thinks it is time that the Engineering Committee should be reviewing the master plans
again. He said he would like an update on the proposed wastewater treatment plant No. 3 near
Ptarmigan Golf Course and the major subdivisions in that area. "That's on indefinite hold," Mr. Smith
responded. "There will be a number of stormwater master plans that you will be involved with," he
said. "We are also doing an update on the wastewater master plan."Mr. Hibbard mentioned that there
will be a new draft of the water and wastewater specifications coming a month or two down the road.
George Reed volunteered to be on the Engineering Committee.
Liaison Issues
The items under this committee are:
Explore implementation of policies regarding regional solutions to current and future water
problems.
Identify proactive steps to develop a regional vision for the management of water, such as
water banks, water court modification and future legislation.
Water Board Minutes
March 25, 1999
Page 13
Meet with regional water boards, mayor's commission and related City boards to discuss
issues of common interest.
Maintain and enhance the interaction and coordinated efforts of management matters with
Larimer County staff and City Council.
Review Northern Colorado Water Conservancy District (NCWCD) Regional Water Demand
Study.
Alison Adams said the closest the Committee has come to the first item was the policy the Water
Board developed for the City Council on how to deal with regional water issues. She mentioned two
items related to regional cooperation: the Regional 201 study which was completed in late 1998, and
a water sharing agreement with the water districts that was implemented last year.
"From a much larger regional perspective, we are not there yet," Ms. Adams stated. The Northern
District is still finishing up their work for the Regional Water Demand Study, but it should be
completed soon. "We are continuing to have the bi-monthly meetings where the different entities are
discussing what their future plans are. Once that gets a little further down the road, I think we can
see if there are some policy issues that come out of that. Also, the Liaison Issues Committee hasn't
looked at, even though it was finished, the Denver's Metropolitan Water Supply Study. We have been
waiting until the District completes their study and until we have a chance to look at everything with
respect to our own water supply study, to see where everything fits in." "What's Northern's time
frame?" Paul Clopper asked. "Actually, it was supposed to have been ready last fall," Ms. Adams
replied. "It could be sometime in the summer that we could be looking at it." "The Liaison Committee
and the Water Supply Committee have been working together on our own demand study."
Also, Robert Ward attends the Larimer/Weld Issues Group and Ms. Adams continues to participate
in Northern's group. She also, for other reasons, has been attending the tri-state Platte River
Cooperative Agreement meetings. The three states are Nebraska, Colorado and Wyoming. "That isn't
something that has an immediate impact on us, but it is good to try to keep abreast of what people
are talking about regionally in water issues," she said.
"We will review the NCWCD Regional Water Demand Study when is comes out," she concluded.
David Lauer asked if the groups that she and Robert Ward participate in are re -inventing the wheel
with two sets of actors and essentially doing the same thing. "Is there any interaction? "It's my
understanding that there are similar players that participate in both groups, primarily through the
Northern District. Originally these two groups did not do the same thing because Northern was
looking at its entire jurisdiction from a water demand/planning perspective, and the Larimer/Weld
group at first didn't know what it wanted to do. In the beginning it was just Fort Collins and Larimer
County looking at water and land use issues," she responded. "They are moving to the point oftrying
to develop some type ofplan to quantify some ways and strategies that Northern Colorado could take
Water Board Minutes
March 25, 1999
Page 14
to protect its water resources from the metropolitan area," Mr. Ward explained. "That is one of the
items that the Northern group has on its agenda," Ms. Adams added., "but the first thing we need to
do is look at the demand, so people won't talk in terns of scare tactics. In other words, let's quantify
some of these demand and water supply issues and then talk about strategies if we have to protect
something," she said. "There seems to be a lot of overlap between what the goals are and the focus
is," Mr. Lauer observed, "especially when you consider, population -wise, the majority of the people
that you are trying to plan for are in those municipalities that Larimer and Weld contain. Northern's
other expanse, geographically, does not have a very large percentage of people beyond that." "But
Northern has the southern pipeline moving water south," Mr. Ward pointed out. "Also Northern has
a concern of filling obligations for whether this is supplemental water for agricultural use or whether
it is municipal water," Ms. Adams noted. "That's a very real issue to them in terms of what
classification this water source is going to be," she stressed. She concluded that the group Mr. Ward
is involved in is taking more shape. "There probably will be either a coming together down the road
or there is going to be some overlap, or there is going to be some conflict, and conflict will be what
brings the groups together to at least discuss issues. I don't think it's there yet, but probably soon;
perhaps within a year."
Joe Bergquist has heard that there has been talk of litigation among the three states in the North
Platte group. "Everybody is litigating over other issues, but they all come together every month and
talk about the cooperative agreement, which, technically, seems to be moving forward," Ms. Adams
responded.
Mr. Ward said there is a study underway to examine various alternatives of meeting the needs of the
ecosystem in central Nebraska. "Probably the most interesting technical discussion is the fact that the
people of central Nebraska are concerned about flooding if any more water is put in the Platte," Ms.
Adams related. "They don't want any more water in the Platte," she stressed. "That's in contrast to
how we can comply with endangered species and all of those issues, when the people are concerned
about basement and land flooding." "This is a situation where there is too much groundwater and yet
there are plans to put more water in the Platte," Mr. Ward remarked. He added that some people are
saying there hasn't been a drought in that area for the lastl8-20 years and droughts tend to lower the
groundwater table.
Water Quality
Paul Clopper pointed out that the next two areas are not represented by standing committees but are
committees of the whole. He asked Mike Smith to field comments and questions from the Board for
water quality. The items are:
Review and monitor Water Treatment Master Plan Improvements.
Review quality trends of raw water, drinking water, wastewater and stormwater, as well as
permits and regulations.
Water Board Minutes
March 25, 1999
Page 15
Review cooperative efforts with other water, wastewater and stormwater entities.
Review efforts to protect sources of drinking water (e.g., Poudre River watershed,
Horsetooth Reservoir) from contamination.
Mitigate stormwater runoff environmental impacts.
(1) Review habitat protection and restoration criteria in master plans.
Mr. Smith said the Water Treatment Master Plan has been adopted and improvements are on the way.
There have been cooperative efforts with the Districts on water sharing. "We have the watershed
program with the Big Thompson and are starting with the Poudre. He wasn't sure where mitigation
of stormwater runoff environmental impacts is. Gale McGaha Miller can update the Board on that,"
he said.
Mr. Ward said he was reading the latest newsletter that comes out of the metropolitan water district
of Southern California. "In it they are talking about MTBE getting into the reservoirs. I don't think
we have that added in our gasoline anymore. The newsletter article says that several districts there
have imposed, or are considering imposing, boating restrictions on reservoirs that are serving water
supply. I wondered if there was any concern on our part about the boating that goes on in Horsetooth
relative to the impact on our water." He provided a copy of the article from the newsletter which
staffwill copy for Board members. "Some contaminants can be measured at Horsetooth," Mike Smith
said. "It's not a big problem now, but we have some concerns about it. Obviously, it's a big political
issue with regard to recreation on Horsetooth Reservoir. It's all part of the issue of watershed
management. You have to let people know that Horsetooth is a source of their drinking water. We
do monitor the water for these contaminants," he assured the Board. He pointed out that the City
restricts boating on Joe Wright Reservoir.
Joe Bergquist asked about Ben Alexander's study for Horsetooth. "The District has some options
there; variable heights, e.g. There haven't been any decisions made on that yet," Mr. Smith replied.
"A consultant has done some studies."
Mr. Clopper recalled that last year Ben Alexander had some preliminary information from the
watershed study. "Is that ongoing?" "Yes it is," Mr. Smith replied. "Will this Board see anymore of
that?' "I'm sure they will, but I can't tell you when," Mr. Smith responded. "They are continuing to
monitor."
"The industry that deals with non -point source pollution, and that includes the erosion sediment
control industry, are gearing up for phase II of the NPDES," Mr. Clopper began. "Are the phase II
regulations going to impact Fort Collins, either in terms of erosion sediment control plans or as part
of development and construction inspection?" "Yes, potentially," Mr. Smith said. "And also outfalls
for stormwater?" Mr. Clopper asked. "We'll have Gale McGaha Miller give you an update on that
also," Mr. Smith replied.
Water Board Minutes
March 25, 1999
Page 16
Mr. Lauer asked Mr. Smith if he thought it was a good idea to coordinate with the high schools in
Fort Collins, Windsor and Greeley who participate in a project called "River Watch." Students go out
once a month in the winter and weekly in the spring to take various basic water samples that get sent
to the Division of Wildlife to be analyzed. He wondered if there was some way the City of Fort
Collins could spearhead a comparison, because nobody has done any reporting on the analyses of
those water samples. This sampling has been going on for about three years. "We have been working
with them on the Big Thompson," Mr. Smith replied. "You may recall when you saw Ben
Alexander's video at the last meeting, one ofthe students they interviewed was part of that program."
"My understanding is some of the raw data from the DOW are available on the intemet," Mr. Lauer
said. His concern is to get a reading watershed -wide for hard metals and for some organic
contaminants to see if there is a higher concentration of heavy metals downstream of Kodak, for
example. Also, to see if there are higher concentrations of organic contamination at various points
along the ag. reaches of the River. "We have the data out there; why don't we see if we can't
coordinate three or four different points down the river?" Mr. Lauer asked. "I'm not sure how much
the students are doing and what kind of data they are taking down there. Kodak has collected data
for years and years in coordination with the City," Mr. Smith explained. "Perhaps Ms. McGaha Miller
could talk about that program," he suggested. "I would like to get a second opinion that is
independent of Kodak," Mr. Lauer persisted, "and independent of people who are testing their own
water, ag. users included." Mr. Smith said staff would look into it.
Stormwater
This section is not represented by a standing committee. The Stormwater items follow:
• Provide for the safe and efficient passage of stormwater runoff.
(1) Variance considerations
a. Floodplain Management
b. Design Criteria Construction Standards
c. Stormwater fees
• Improve delivery of services
• (1) Review FEMA Community Rating System
• Support efforts associated withthe implementation ofFEMA's "Project Impacf 'designation.
• Review and make recommendations on the matter to revise floodplain regulations.
Paul Clopper said we are looking at a 12 month horizon for the Floodplain regulations. The Task
Force, made up of a variety of members from the community, was created by Stormwater staff, to
look at that. "That will probably occupy most of our efforts for 1999," he concluded.
Mr. Clopper announced that there will be a variance request hearing for two Old Town sites at the
April Water Board meeting. He asked for a show of hands of those who plan to be at the meeting.
"We must have a quorum to take action at a variance hearing," he stressed.
Water Board Minutes
March 25, 1999
Page 17
PLANS FOR HOSTING JOINT MEETING OF LOVELAND, GREELEY AND FORT COLLINS
WATER BOARDS AND STAFF
Molly Nortier referred to the latest Loveland Water Board minutes which gave an account of the
Board's deliberations and their vote to combine their Utility Advisory Board and Water Board.
According to a Loveland staff member, the new commission's emphasis will be on the electric side
because of the potential for deregulation. The commission members will not be selected until the end
of May. At this time, their staff isn't sure if Loveland will be participating in the joint meeting this
spring. George Reed suggested that we might use this opportunity to invite District water boards and
staff or perhaps Windsor to the joint meeting. Paul Clopper decided, instead of taking Board time,
that he, Tom Sanders, Mike Smith and Molly Nortier meet next week to select a date and make plans
for the joint meeting. There will be a report on this item at the April meeting.
STAFF REPORTS
Treated Water Production Summary
Dennis Bode reported that for February the City was about 11% above what had been projected. The
actual treated water use was 1,550 ac-ft. "We are running at about the same pace for March," he said.
The average temperatures for January, February and March so far, have been warmer than normal.
"You can also see that on the graph handed out today." On the back of the water use graph there are
also a couple of graphs that show the SNOTEL sites at Joe Wright Reservoir and Deadman Hill. Both
of those sites have been tracking close to average, although the last couple of weeks have been
trailing off.
Rainfall Study Update
Bob Smith informed the Board that City Council had adopted the revised rainfall criteria at its March
16' Council meeting. They adopted a new rainfall amount of 3.67" for the 100-year 2 hour storm.
The Council also amended the City Code to read that the General Manager of the Fort Collins
Utilities has the authority to amend master drainage plans for the sole purpose of enhancing said plan,
based on reliable data and information. Dave Rau asked how the new criteria will be implemented
with regard to new development. Mr. Smith replied that City Council, as part of the adoption of the
new rainfall criteria, also specified that the new criteria could not be applied to any land development
which is in the development review process. Furthermore, staff will not be using this new number in
the drainage basin master plans.
Gravel Pits Update
Dennis Bode said the only thing that has happened since the last meeting is that the Gravel Pits item
was also discussed at the Natural Resources Board meeting last week. They are also supportive of
that concept and ofboth boards working together to provide some storage reservoir space in the area
discussed at the March meeting. The intent is to take that question to City Council probably on April
Water Board Minutes
March 25, 1999
Page 18
20'". "You may recall that what we need to do is get money appropriated, after which we would make
an offer. There is a first right of refusal, so I'm not sure if.it would go through or not," he said.
"Wasn't the money about $600,000 from the Water Utility and $200-300,000 from Natural
Resources?" Mr. Clopper asked. "Yes, those are the approximate numbers," Mr. Bode replied.
Update: Greeley Land Exchange
"There is nothing new on the Greeley land exchange," Mike Smith reported. "It's really a Forest
Service land exchange now. Greeley hasn't expressed any desire to pursue anything, so we are just
sitting on it now." "That was the deal that involved Seaman Reservoir and the land up at Kelley Flats
Campground," Mr. Clopper reminded the Board. Mr. Smith related that the appraiser just recently
completed the appraisal of the land. "Our land seems to be worth quite a lot more than the land the
Forest Service has, so we are going to have to figure out how we are going to work the trade," he
said. "We are hopeful that by the end of the year the deal will be completed." "Do you think the land
valuation has something to do with the fact you haven't heard from them?" Mr. Lauer asked. "No,
they were waiting for the survey from the BLM, and they did the survey in the summer and just now
finished the office work. They couldn't finish the appraisal until they had the legal descriptions which
were slow in coming."
Water Board 1998 Annual Report
Board members received copies of the 1998 Water Board Annual Report in their packets. Molly
Nortier said this report will be included in the Fort Collins Utilities Annual Report as well. The Board
thought that it was a good summary of what they had done.
COMMITTEE REPORTS
Conservation and Public Education
The Conservation and Public Education Committee was the only committee that met. David Lauer
reported that Marsha Hilmes, Floodplain Administrator, talked to the Committee about Flood
Awareness Week which will take place May 2-8. Flood Education Day is a part of that and will be
held at the Foothills Fashion Mall on May 2'. Ms. Hilmes said this year there are many more
organizations involved. In addition to the Utilities contributions, there will be the City's Office of
Emergency Management, the Red Cross, National Flood Insurance Program, Western Insurance
Information Service, CSU Water Center, Colorado Climate Center, Emergency Management
Information Network, Colorado Office ofEmergency Management and Water Conservation Board,
and the U.S. Geological Survey. "I would urge all the Board members who are going to be in town
to participate in the event," Mr. Lauer said.
Water Board Minutes
March 25, 1999
Page 19
OTHER BUSINESS
Water Strategist Report
Dennis Bode explained that this larger publication takes the place ofthe "Water Intelligence Monthly"
which Board members have received for a number of years. The Water Strategist is a combination
of two reports. "Are you interested in continuing to receive copies ofthe new publication?" Mr. Bode
asked. The consensus was that the Board would like to receive it.
ADJOURNMENT
Since there was no further business, the meeting was adjourned at 5:07 p.m.
Water Board Secretary