Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutAir Quality Advisory Board - Minutes - 06/22/1999MINUTES CITY OF FORT COLLINS AIR QUALITY ADVISORY BOARD REGULAR MEETING 281 N. COLLEGE AVE. June 22,1999 For Reference: Eric Levine, Chair - 229-5225 Scott Mason, Council Liaison - 226-4824 Brian Woodruff, Staff Liaison 221-6604 Board Members Present John Schroeer, Eric Levine, Jim Dennison, Mandar Sunthankar, Steve Perich and Raymond Sons Board Members Absent Harry Edwards and David Gallup Staff Present Natural Resources Department Brian Woodruff, and Susie Gordon Guests None The meeting was called to order at 7:00 p.m. Sally Maggart, Lucinda Smith, Tom Shoemaker The minutes of the May 25, 1999 meeting were approved as written. Review and Update Action List 1. Done. Memo in packet. 2. E-mail sent to members. 3. Done. Memo in packet. Eric Levine asked if copies of Coloradoan newspaper articles of interest to the Board could be included in the packets. Review Council six-month planning calendar • June 29 — Council Policy Agenda • July 20 — Cities for Climate Protection will be rescheduled to September or October. • July 27 — Interim Solid Waste Reduction Plan OLD BUSINESS Air Quality Analysis Options, Brian Woodruff Brian Woodruff, Sr. Environmental Planner, explained that the emissions inventory analysis is the basic option. He said that an example is the Northeast Truck Route analysis included in the Board's packet. Woodruff said that the other option is the concentration analysis that measures the concentration of pollutants in the air. He added that the focus is on answering the question, "Are we analyzing it right?" Air Quality Advisory Board June 22, 1999 Page 2 Jim Dennison asked if it is appropriate to see a timeline for data analysis, and would it be something staff would be able to do or would additional resources be necessary. Woodruff responded that sufficient time would have to be scheduled to generate the information brought to the Board. He noted that some Boardmembers declined to vote on the Mountain Vista Subarea Plan because an analysis had not been done. Raymond Sons asked if there is an analysis of air quality modeling for Mountain Vista now. Woodruff responded no, and explained that the plan was developed to implement activity centers as called for in City Plan for trip purposes. Levine asked where the guarantee is that the market will invest in activity centers and if there are any contingencies or alternative plans. Tom Shoemaker, Natural Resources Director, explained that the Land Use Code that implements City Plan is more prescriptive than the old Land Development Guidance System (LDGS), and if zoning holds and code holds, adequate public facilities will be provided. Woodruff referred back to the air quality analysis issue. He noted that Harry Edwards said that staff could do some type of box model analysis, but the question is, what is the desired policy goal? Steve Perich noted that Edward's issue centered on staff requesting action from the Board and not providing adequate information for the Board to make a decision. Woodruff said that guidance is needed about what kind of analysis is wanted, emissions or concentrations, and what principle will be accomplished. John Schroeer said that the plan was presented as meeting City Plan requirements and the Board wanted proof. Woodruff said that it is important to know what the Board would approve and what it would disapprove. He added that there is no purpose in doing the analysis without knowing that. Perich said that criteria should be identified. Shoemaker noted that there are presently two projects under way, Mason Street Corridor and Campus West, based on City Plan land use patterns. Regarding Mason Street Corridor, Levine said that he would like to see the options for modal mix and what the VMT impact reduction measures would be. Sons said that the mix of possible uses might not be determined until September. Woodruff said that he could request that the team working on the Mason Street Corridor determine alternatives and VMT growth scenarios to present to the Board. Sunthankar asked if the Harmony Corridor has been considered. He noted that Celestica's hiring of 500 more employees would impact the Corridor. Woodruff noted that a Harmony Corridor Plan has already been adopted and Celestica's growth is consistent with the Plan. Schroeer asked how bicycle "VMT" is factored. Woodruff said that transportation modelers do that and suggested that John Daggett be invited to a future meeting to provide an explanation. Schroeer said that he is interested in comparing City Plan to the old LDGS. Shoemaker noted that the Congestion Management Plan (CMP) had modeling scenarios of different development densities and different transportation investment policies. He said that since City Plan is based on the CMP, the data could be dusted off and compared. Air Quality Advisory Board* • ' June 22, 1999 Page 3 Woodruff asked what analysis model the Board would prefer if a proposal like the Wal Mart development were presented to the Board next month. Schroeer said that a comparison of VMT, trips made, stops at lights, and a box model analysis of concentrations before and after development would-be needed. Levine said that he would like to see projections on what impact there would be if the south Wal Mart store closed after the new one was built. Perich suggested looking at the different variables, e.g., the attraction of regional shoppers, as well as a citywide analysis on the air quality impact. Shoemaker said that it is important to keep in mind that analysis is focused on some level of decisionmaking. He noted that Wal Mart is a site -specific development proposal and there may be alternatives in terms of site layout and design of the proposal. Woodruff asked what the basis would be for the Board to approve or deny projects. Sons responded that, since the policy is to reduce area wide emissions, if the project would not do so, then the Board would disapprove the project. Woodruff asked to what would projected emissions be compared. Sons responded that the comparison would be made to today's figures. Woodruff said that almost any development would increase local emissions. Sons noted that City Plan is designed to reduce VMT travel with activity centers. Shoemaker noted that the Board currently does not have a decision -making role for site specific proposals like Wal Mart as does the Planning & Zoning Board. But it is within the Board's purview to provide input to Council on a number of land use issues in the context of sub -area plans and transportation planning issues. AQAB role in development review, Brian Woodruff Tom Shoemaker said that there are three options available to the Board: Option 0 is to do nothing and make no changes in the Land Use Code; Option 1 is to make a recommendation to Council on changes to the Land Use Code needed to evaluate and make decisions about the impact of individual development proposals on air quality; and Option 2 is to amend City Code to get authority to advise the Planning & Zoning Board on development applications. Option 1 is a necessary precursor to Option 2. Shoemaker said that staff thinks Option 1 is necessary even if Option 2 is what the Board wants. He added that staff -would advise Council against Option 2 because of the issue with City Plan regarding consistency in development review and the concern of citizens about the length of the development review process. He added that it is important to understand, with a formal review process, that it is necessary to say in advance which projects get reviewed and have concrete criteria for approval, otherwise the process is arbitrary. Levine noted that the political process is open and allows citizens to testify before the Planning & Zoning Board and City Council. He said that his intention is to allow the Board to advise on development projects if asked by Council. Shoemaker said that while boards advise the City Council as part of the City structure, Board members are free to advise the Planning Zoning Board as individual citizens. Air Quality Advisory Board June 22, 1999 Page 4 Dennison asked if there are any other municipalities that have air quality criteria in land use codes. Woodruff said that he would research it. Dennison said that while it would be nice to have a role in development review and there might be a day for that, it might be worth exploring changes to the Land Use Code that would insert objective air quality criteria into the development review process. Mandar Sunthankar moved to make recommendations to Council on needed Land Use Code changes and related planning tools that would be used to evaluate and limit the air quality impact of individual land use development applications. Jim Dennison seconded the motion. After the acceptance of a friendly amendment to include a six-month time frame, the motion passed unanimously (6-0). Shoemaker suggested that staff frame a short memo to Council and Council's Growth Management Committee with the recommendation and to communicate to them the Board's desires. He noted that the Land Use Code is revised twice a year in November and May. NEW BUSINESS Visibility, Lucinda Smith & Brian Woodruff Brian Woodruff noted that the Board had discussed a visibility policy at their last retreat. He said that an RFP would be issued to hire a consultant to evaluate data to determine if the Air Quality Action Plan is on the right track. The Board will have a chance to comment on the RFP. Levine asked what data are being analyzed. Woodruff responded that information would be developed to evaluate and prioritize current AQAP actions with respect to the impact on visibility reduction and highlight which actions impact visibility reduction. OTHER Dennison expressed concern about filling the vacancy in the Board's membership. Woodruff said that a new member will be appointed July 6 and will be at the next meeting. The Board voted unanimously (6-0) to extend the meeting time five minutes. Woodruff reported that the Natural Resources Department would have a booth at the New West Fest on August 21 and 22. He said that volunteers are needed. Woodruff reported that the SIP Committee did not meet. He said that further information would be provided in the next packet. The meeting adjourned at 9:35 p.m.