Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutNatural Resources Advisory Board - Minutes - 12/04/2002MINUTES CITY OF FORT COLLINS NATURAL RESOURCES ADVISORY BOARD REGULAR MEETING 281 N. COLLEGE December 4, 2002 For Reference: Randy Fischer, NRAB Chair - 226-5383 Ray Martinez, Council Liaison - 416-2154 Michelle Pawar, Staff Liaison - 221-6263 Board Members Present Kelly Ohlson, Nate Donovan, Arvind Panjabi, Don Rodriguez, Reagan Waskom, and Steve Ryder Board Members Absent Linda Knowlton, Phil Murphy and Randy Fischer Staff Present Natural Resources Dent: Mark Sears, Michelle Pawar, and Sally Maggart Transportation Services: Matt Baker, Cam McNair, Ron Phillips, and Gary Diede Utilities: Bob Smith Guests Marcia Klairy, Jim Cox, and Bo Vonburg, CSU students David Roy, City Councilmember Bill Miller, Sierra Club Eric Hamrich, City Councilmember Robert Patterson, Sierra Club Don Taranto, TST Shar Shadowen, TST Steve Long — Cedar Creek Associates Meegan Flenniken, Larimer County Open Lands Program K-lynn Cameron, Larimer County Open Lands Program The meeting was called to order at 6:05 p.m. Agenda Review New Business: Add consideration of recommendation that staff pursue requiring trash haulers to collect magazines and catalogs at curbside. Boardmembers expressed appreciation to Reagan Waskom for his volunteer service. Waskom said that he has enjoyed serving on the Board. Natural Resources Advisory Board • December 4, 2002 Page 2 of 12 Minutes: November 6, 2002 Reagan Waskom moved to adopt the minutes of November 6, 2002. Don Rodriguez seconded the motion. The minutes were unanimously approved. Fossil Creek Park Management Plan, Meegan Flenniken Meegan Flenniken, Larimer County Open Lands, said that she is looking for formal approval of the plan. • Ohlson: The draft in the packet is a good presentation of issues and responses. I recommend going through it page by page. Under staff comments, #1, I hope in the future that "sensitive" means natural features are protected. Under #5, what does it mean to add a "regional trail'. • Fleeniken: It got left off the map. • Ohlson: #13b: Is the observation area adequately handled through other areas? • Fleeniken: The Fossil Creek natural area will allow a view of prairie dogs and wetlands. Duck Lake needs restoration work and is not quite as attractive; that is why the focus is on that. • Ohlson: #15: What are the options for pavement types at the entry road and parking lot? Does staff have any thoughts? • Sears: Do we really need to have pavement? From a maintenance standpoint, pavement is the way to go, but maybe it could be softened with chip seal to make it look more like a gravel road. • Ohlson: I suggest adding that. • Sears: It will be looked at during the actual design. • Cameron: We appreciate the City partnering with us on the development of facilities. There may be a time when the City wants a higher level of development, and we would ask for help with paying for that. We are trying to put our dollars in acquisition. • Ohlson: I hope the City follows through with that. If the City has the resources to contribute, they should. • Ohlson: #21a: I would like the City to contribute more than 50150 for purchase and development. I would like City Council and staff to look at it to determine if it is an appropriate split. • Cameron: We will not turn it down. If you want to buy the last ten acre parcel, we would love it. • Donovan: Is there an obligation through the IGA to purchase the ten acres. • Cameron: There is an obligation to split the cost 50150 if there is a willing seller. We would have to amend the IGA. What we have now is a Memorandum of Understanding between the two programs to share the costs of development. • Sears: As we work through the design, we will sit down with K-lynn and come up with a good agreement. • Ohlson: The City benefits from County residents shopping here. With the new City tax, a 50150 split is not as fair now. Natural Resources Advisory Board December 4, 2002 Page 3 of 12 • Cameron: The IGA specifically calls out certain parcels identified for a 50150 split. All parcels have been acquired except the last ten acre parcel. Verbally, the City takes the lead in all the resource management of the area around Fossil Creek Reservoir. • Donovan: Are there any comments from other boardmembers? • Rodriguez: Is there any type of contingency written into the plan regarding monitoring the site? • Flenniken: The County does ongoing management in all plans. The Audubon Society is monitoring the bird sites and the County is monitoring the prairie dog sites. • Rodriguez: What are the performance standards when talking about the impact of equestrian and recreation use? • Flenniken: We do vegetation monitoring and will look into more indicators. • Panjabi: Do you monitor the use of the area, social trends and trespassing. • Flenniken: Yes, we do that. • Cameron: There will be an on -site park manager. • Ohlson: I'm a big supporter of the County program but have heard that the County is looking at corporate sponsorship of open space and natural areas. Are you thinking of that? • Cameron: We are getting the business community involved and have put together a program to raise dollars to support natural areas. • Ohlson: A lot of the business community opposed us on the open space sales tax. • Cameron: This is another way to work with them. We are not looking at naming areas after the corporate community. This is a way to help out financially. We give recognition to the voters of Larimer County for supporting the open space program, acknowledge land owners for donations, and others for volunteer service as well as banks for giving us dollars. • Ohlson: I hope the City has serious concerns about corporate partnering. It is bad, unfair, unjust, and inappropriate. I withdraw all I said about increasing the 50150 split. • Cameron: We have a huge volunteer program. We work with corporations and get employees to identify with our areas. This is a way to get support for our program. • Ohlson: Will there be a Wendy's logo on a sign at a natural area? • Cameron: There could be a plaque on a shelter if somebody pays for the shelter. • Ohlson: This is a bad idea. • Pawar: Is there any corporate sponsorship for Fossil Creek Reservoir? • Cameron: Yes, Wal Mart and New Belgium Brewing. • Ohlson: I don't get it. Does the City have a say? • Pawar: We need to have this conversation later. • Donovan: The point was made. We need to move on. Are there any other comments? • Rodriguez: Will there be any lighting and will it be shielded? • Fleenikan: Yes, there will be lighting under the eave of the building for security purposes. Natural Resources Advisory Board • December 4, 2002 Page 4 of 12 • Fleeniken: The next stage is to adopt a final plan with the changes made to the plan and maps. The next step is to go to the Open Lands Board. • Ohlson: I am not ready to support it with the corporate thing. • Fleeniken: The plan does not discuss any of that. That could still be a discussion item. • Donovan: We need to have a discussion about partnering on projects and how much each entity has to say. If it is not specified in a management plan, then it is up to elected officials and staff to decide what happens. • Cameron: Our management plans do not talk about how to fund projects. The IGA can reflect that. The management plan is an agreement on how to manage the resources. • Donovan: Is there City staff, City Council and Board involvement on amending the IGA? • Cameron: Yes. • Donovan: Is it at the discretion of County staff in terms of recognitions for contributions by whomever? • Cameron: The IGA says that the County will manage the property according to the management plan and the County and City share equally in the acquisition of the property; each will have a 50 percent ownership. That's all it says at this time. An addition to the IGA would talk about the cost share of development. Now it says that the County will do 100 percent of the development. • Donovan: Now that we understand about the contributions by other than publicly funded tax dollars, what are the commitments for the money? • Cameron: Some have been paid. The corporate share is around $5,000. • Ohlson: It appears to be corporate sponsorship rather than contribution. We do not need corporate logos in open space. • Cameron: You don't want logos? • Ohlson: If you want to recognize corporate contributions, do it on an annual report, not in land. That sends the wrong message. • Cameron: That sounds right. Not a problem. • Hamrick: If you were to address signage, would that be done in the IGA or in the management plan? • Cameron: What we have now in the MOU is that City and County staff will work together to develop construction specifications, design criteria and environmental education as a team. The plan talks in general about having signage but does not have the level of detail that would be included in the IGA or MOU. • Pawar: Should it be in the MOU or the IGA? • Cameron: A binding, legal IGA has to be changed in order for the City to participate in cost sharing. • Pawar: That will be our opportunity to add that in. • Cameron: We might not want to get into that detail. We did the MOU because it was important to City staff to be at the table during the construction agreement. Natural Resources Ad• ry Board • December 4, 2002 Page 5 of 12 Kelly Ohlson made the motion to approve the Fossil Creek Resource Management Plan. Regan Waskom seconded the motion. A friendly amendment was made and accepted by Ohlson and Waskom to make the approval contingent on recommended changes made to the plan. The motion passed unanimously (6-0). Electric Energy Supply This was discussed at the last meeting. A memorandum from Mike Smith, Utilities General Manager, with the Revised Draft Electric Energy Supply Policy was included in the packet. Boardmember Comments: • Ohlson: The issues with habitat weren't considered. • Ohlson: It is ridiculous to reduce per capita electric consumption just ten percent. • Donovan: hi terms of consumption, is it reasonable to compare water and electricity? • Ohlson: No. The peak load deals with air conditioning. • Ryder: The baseline might be a five to seven percent increase per year; 10 percent could be a considerable savings depending on the rate of growth. • Ohlson: Mike's been responsive and has done his best. • Waskom: The revised policy includes major things recommended by the Board and I support it. • Panjabi: I'm surprised that how future demand will be provided for is not included. • Ohlson: Implementing green building including regulatory requirements needs to be included. • Ohlson: Under Objectives for the Future, #8 sounds like building a Rawhide 2. My concern is about doing things so we don't have to build a Rawhide 2. It doesn't say anything about systemic change. • Donovan: Should a statement about Rawhide 2 be put in our feedback to Mike Smith or in recommendation to Council? • Ohlson: It should go forward. • Panjabi: It should go in because it is a key component of supply and is not addressed. • Waskom: Take it back to Mike for clarification on Item 1 if 10 percent reduction is as good as we can do. • Ohlson: I will call Mike and get clarification on the rate and Rawhide thing and get an explanation in writing for discussion at the next board meeting. • Panjabi: I am interested in knowing the projection of how much more increase in supply the current Rawhide plant could provide. What percentage of growth will it be able to handle before looking at building a new plant? • Ryder: We have dealt with Rawhide 2 in the environmental objectives. If consumption is reduced by 10 percent and the population grows, we are at the same demand. Somewhere we can address the demand side and efficiency where we're not creating a demand for it to be built. How these numbers make sense might be a way of addressing additional load capacity. • Boardmembers agreed that Ohlson will discuss these points with Mike Smith. Natural Resources Ad• ry Board • December 4, 2002 Page 6 of 12 Community Separators, Michelle Pawar Michelle Pawar asked if there were any questions related to Tom Vosburg's e-mail sent to boardmembers today. She noted that an ad hoc meeting was held to discuss the Community Separator Study. Based on that meeting, Vosburg is preparing a comprehensive issues/questions response that addresses the NRAB issues. • Donovan: Was anyone here at the ad hoc meeting? • Rodriguez: Yes. Fischer and Knowlton also attended. • Ohlson: We've had an adopted plan for four years. Is there anybody out in the field buying community separators? When is anyone going to buy land? • Pawar: Based on Vosburg's study and property owner outreach, we have had a couple of positive bites. We want to do easements in the Timnath area. • Sears: We are working on a number of potential sales in Windsor. • Ohlson: Will easements keep the same units as there are now? • Pawar: Yes. • Sears: We will either have a donation of conservation easements or will pay. If we pay, we are purchasing the development rights. • Ohlson: I am concerned about paying 80 percent of cost for 10 percent of benefit. • Donovan: I want to stress that Vosburg will be coming to the January meeting. It is important that as soon as the revised final draft is done, it can be made public and mailed to boardmembers. • Pawar: The GOCO Project Commission decided not to accept the joint application we made via the Community Separator Study Team. GOCO staff made a strong recommendation urging boardmembers to provide $400,000 to the team and the board elected not to do that. We walked away with zero. The feedback we received was that they did not feel the amount of money and the total cost of the project was worth what kind of land we were getting. • Ohlson: The inside scoop is that the GOCO Board is packed with anti -open space people who do not believe in public ownership of land. GOCO is now being run out of the governor's office. Timberline Road, Michelle Pawar Michelle Pawar, Natural Resources Director, summarized that the proposed project is an opportunity to work jointly with other City departments, with the benefit of a one-time disturbance, rather than three -times, to the area. The consultant, Don Taranto, is prepared to give an overview. Mark Sears noted that there have been a few changes in the scope of work to be laid out on the table. Taranto: The Fort Collins/Loveland Water District identified a potential win/win for a one-time disturbance, and took the proposal to Engineering. The project attempts to address transportation needs, the utility corridor, and crossing a highly sensitive environmental area. This is a very beneficial project to the City and the District. The road is a minor arterial in the adopted Transportation Plan. In the I-25 Corridor Study, it is a four lane. Natural Resources Ad• ry Board • December 4, 2002 Page 7 of 12 • Sears: The road has been shrunk back to as minimum a road that we can build through that section. • Taranto: The hydrologic issues are important to the wetland. We are working with folks to preserve the wetland and protect health, safety and welfare issues in crossing Timberline. Not a lot has happened since Monday's meeting. • Pawar: We were committed to sending a memo to TST within 48 hours of Monday's meeting detailing the studies and data we need. • Sears: The studies are the ecological characterization defined by the land use code, migratory waterfowl and waterbird study, protection of wildlife habitat, winter raptor, and redtail hawk nest report, wetland boundary delineation, hydrologic water and groundwater studies (not in Land Use Code). Boardmembers requested the studies be sent to them as well. • Donovan: Is there a process on how to deal with the different aspects of transportation, storm drainage and the wetland area? Do we deal with the three issues separately or together? • Ohlson: Start with the road thing. How wide is the existing road and how wide do you envision this project? Who pays the consultants? • Taranto: The consultants are paid by the City and the Water District. • McNair: The vicinity map shows where the waterline project is going to go. We do not have road improvements planned for this now. The two lane road that carries traffic is adequate for today. The Stormwater Department is not planning to upsize the bridge right away, but it is in their Master Plan. The waterline project is an opportunity to fix a lot of things at once instead of going back time -after -time to upgrade infrastructure. The road project was presented as a long-range project with two lanes and two bike lanes that needs to accommodate the width necessary for a new water line. This is based on the assumption that the roadway would shift to the west side and not disturb the east side. That could change and it could center over the existing road or shift to the east. • Waskom: What is the existing width? • Baker: 34' • Donovan: Is it drawn to represent an increase in elevation of the proposed new two- lane road. • Baker: Correct. • Waskom: Where does the fill come from? • McNair: It comes from the waterline. • Ohlson: Is the four extra feet of road not in the same place vertically or horizontally? It's like a new road in a different location and causes disruption. • McNair: This may not be the best place. • Phillips: One option is to put it back the way it is. This shows the most extensive option. It could be less extensive. • Donovan: I can't get a sense that this proposal gains much surface from the existing to the proposed roadway. • Taranto: There is two feet of elevation difference. Natural Resources Advisory Board • December 4, 2002 Page 8of12 • McNair: The scale is not precise. • Ohlson: The rumor is that the water line has shifted and would require more fill now. • Taranto: The water line will be in the roadway. • McNair: The confluence of the water line and the bridge for storm flows will be critical. Putting the waterline on top of the bridge structure is important for future access and maintenance repairs. That is what is driving the elevation of the road. If the water line is put in with no other improvements, it could be costly later. We don't want to go back and undo the work. • Ohlson: When will the road go from two lane to four lane? • McNair: It is not a four lane on the Master Street Plan. This should carry the load for the next five years. • Panjabi: If the road does not need to be widened, why is it being moved? I am concerned about the disturbance and loss of wetlands on the west side of the road. Why not work within the existing road base? • Phillips: We have examined all options from leaving the road where it is now and not doing stormwater improvements. We believe the improvement at this point to add the road and bike lanes is reasonable as long as there will be some disturbance anyway. Improvements are needed for the safety of the bike lanes. • Panjabi: Is there a lot of bike traffic? • Phillips: Timberline is a major bike route between Fort Collins and Loveland. It is in the Regional Plan as a bicycle corridor. • McNair: When raising the road, the slopes need to be stabilized. We could confine the destruction to one side. Alignment along the west side worked out better because we will have to swing around a state record tree. • Taranto: The vertical component is associated with the hydrologics of the basin. Now it overtops with less than a 100 year storm. Part of the solution is raising the road and providing capacity underneath using culverts. • Donovan: Is there any other alternative to the bridge in working with the elevation. • Smith: With the new rainfall standard, we are looking at putting a larger culvert under the railroad track to get the water into the open space. This is a health, safety and welfare issue. • Panjabi: What is the cost analysis? • Taranto: It is almost a given that the costibenefit relationship will be positive for events as small as five years. • Donovan: What about from a historical perspective? We need a quantification of repair costs. • Diede: We do not want water overtopping major roadways. It makes the roads impassable. The policy with arterials is there can be no water deeper than six inches over it. It is planned to have a new culvert under the railroad in the next five years; once that is done, we have to do something with the structure on Timberline. • Rodriguez: Will you use eight box culverts? • Taranto: Something like that. Natural Resources Ad• ry Board • December 4, 2002 Page 9 of 12 • Smith: We are looking at alternatives. When the need for the waterline came up, we saw it as an opportunity to take advantage of savings in traffic control, etc., but we could wait and do it later and it will be disruptive again. We want to enhance the wetlands. • Ohlson: Have Council decide if it should be a two or four lane. It is smarter to do it now. • McNair: Council does decide this. The Master Street Plan shows this as a minor arterial. We are proposing a good interim improvement that will last for a foreseeable future and if things develop as it might, this might change. It is hard to say what needs will be in ten or twenty years. • Ohlson: The irony is that the new water line is going to be the thing that creates more traffic and leads to a four lane road. • McNair: The water line is needed to provide water to approved developments. It will go under I-25 to serve the new County event center. This line needs to go in this year. • Panjabi: There will be irreparable damage to a crucial wildlife habitat and that is not mitigable. You cannot create that kind of wetland. • Pawar: Panjabi works for Rocky Mountain Bird Observatory and does extensive work on this area. He is viewed as a tremendous resource and has agreed to review the documents on behalf of the Natural Resources Department. • Rodriguez: What is the projected loss of wetlands? • Phillips: 2.44 acres. • Ohlson: What are the plans to mitigate that loss? • Taranto: We would build wetlands. We looked at three alternative areas: We rejected the one to the west of the railroad tracks, we would have to go down 15 feet and there is not much chance for hydrology. The second alternative is in the low lying area on the edge of the existing wetland where the soils are highly saline. The third choice that we like the best is away from the housing development. • Steve Long, Cedar Creek Associates: We decided to do it at the comer of Carpenter and Timberline. We have drilled six holes on four acres trying to find hydrology and good soils. The water is about at seven feet in the lower area. This area will give the water needed, has good soils and good hydrology. • Ohlson: Who is paying for the mitigation? • Taranto: It is part of the construction costs paid by the City and the District. • Panjabi: How do you judge a good wetland? • Taranto: Patches of cattails, with a good mix of plant species. • Panjabi: The existing wetland provides a habitat for a wide variety of birds. This needs to be considered in the mitigation plan. • Long: We do not know what wetlands will be impacted. The Corps of Engineers do require certain things. The Corps is opposed to the reintroduction of cattails. • Ohlson: The rumor mill has it that something related to this is added to Council's worksession on Tuesday. • Phillips: It is not on the agenda. There will be a memo in Council's packet. Natural Resources Ad• ry Board • December 4, 2002 Page 10 of 12 • Long: There are monitoring ports on the Fossil Creek wetlands that we created for the City. Hetty Bixby, City Landscape Architect, is monitoring the plant life. • Donovan: Is monitoring done for wildlife? • Long: No. If vegetation is recreated, the wildlife will reestablish. • Ohlson: I question that. • Taranto: The existing wetlands is 38 feet from a road that is traveled significantly. If we put the wetlands farther away from the road in a less traveled area, it is hard to imagine there will be less wildlife. • Panjabi: I dispute that. Have you looked at what type of wetland, soil, hydrology and wildlife are on the west side of the road? • Long: We have done it. • Rodriguez: There is a difference between species. The existing wetland is a unique habitat that attracts a rich diversity of water fowl. • Waskom: When will the waterline be constructed? • Taranto: The original schedule was to start in January 2003. We intend to move forward with two miles of the pipeline not associated with Timberline as soon as possible. We believe that the water line has to go down Timberline Road by 2003-04. We cannot prolong it past that. • Donovan: What is the 404 process timeline? • Taranto: It will take at least 60 days, depending on complications. • Donovan: Does the process include wildlife population impacts or studies of plants/hydrology/soils? • Long: The Corps does not require a wildlife analysis. The permit processing realistically takes a total of 120 days. • Panjabi: You did not mention that the preferred mitigation site will destroy some other critical wildlife habitat, the prairie dog colony. This is an important bald eagle wintering area and that is not being addressed. • Long: You are right. • Bill Miller, former member of NRAB: I am upset that taxpayer dollars were used to protect the land and now taxpayer dollars are being used to tear it up. The Fort Collins Audubon Society inventoried the area about four years ago. It is a significant birding area, with 95 species having been cited. Is there an alternative route for the water line? Why couldn't it be closer to the railroad alignment south of Carpenter? The Audubon Society will take a strong stand, and the Sierra Club is not happy about the destruction of wetlands. A higher variety of birds use the west side. I recommend using the east side and hope the stormwater culverts are sized for a two-lane, not a four -lane, road. • Panjabi: I agree that the west side is more sensitive and has a large diversity of birds. We should take extra time, money and effort to route around the area. • Taranto: We have looked at alternate routes. If we try to go to the east, we will have to tear up another road and impact more wetlands. The economics would go upside down on us. • Long: The east side is better for a new wetland because of the mud flats. Natural Resources Ad• ry Board • December 4, 2002 Page 11 of 12 • Phillips: There has not yet been a final decision on the wetland mitigation. It is still under study and the Natural Resources Department wants a further analysis. • McNair: Stormwater utility fees and development impact fees are financing the project, along with some small general fund contribution. • Donovan: Randy Fischer wrote a memo recommending opposing any alternative with an impact on the wetland. He said the best outcome is to have the project go away. He opposes any alternatives with uncertain outcomes. • Ohlson: There are no alternative routes for the water line? • Taranto: That is correct. This is the right location with the least impact for environmental and other issues. • Sears: The water line has no impact on the wetlands. It could be put through it, but the wetland would come back. The road widening is going to physically eliminate 2.4 acres of wetland. This is a significant loss. The stormwater project is critical because of the concern about 40 or 50 acres of wetland that could be impacted by floods downstream and upstream. • Donovan: What is the next step? What is the timeframe and look at alternatives? • McNair: It hinges on Sears' memo. • Taranto: I got the memo at 4:30 p.m. and am not prepared to comment. • McNair: The design process can proceed and the application for a 404 permit. • Phillips: Part of the sequence would be to come back to the board to share information. We need things to happen quickly so there could be a request for a special meeting. • Miller: Would the elevation of Timberline have to be raised for the entire length to prevent overtopping? Could the fill area be shifted to the existing alignment? • Shar Shadown, TST consultant: The location of the culvert and where the water line is going over the culvert is not where the elevation of the road is being established. The elevation is based on flooding, farther to the north. • Panjabi: I request we get a chance to look at the characterization of the wetlands for the west side of the road. We have not received enough information. • Taranto: We will create a package of answers and get them out soon. • Long: Three written reports have been sent to the Corps of Engineers. • Donovan: I would like to see the reports. • Taranto: We will put together packets by the end of the week and will give a timeline for the rest. Packets will be made for the Sierra Club and Audubon Society. New Business Solid Waste Issue: The Solid Waste Committee met and would like the Board to consider a recommendation that staff pursue collection of magazines and catalogs at curbside. • Waskom: Does staff want this? • Donovan: Yes, it is one element in the recycling phase that committee members and staff feel is doable. The County and the trash haulers have been briefed. • Waskom: Would it include junk mail? Natural Resources Adv ry Board • December 4, 2002 Page 12 of 12 Rob Petterson, Sierra Club member: The basic premise is that County staff has indicated they think they can take magazines now. It does not include junk mail or office paper. If it goes well, they might be able to accept office paper. This would be the first step. Reagan Waskom made a motion to recommend that staffpursue collection of magazines and catalogs at curbside. Don Rodriguez seconded the motion. The motion passed unanimously (5-0). (Ohlson was not present for the vote) Retreat: Donovan distributed a copy of his e-mail regarding the possible dates for a retreat. He suggested that it would be an opportunity for boardmembers to learn more about each other and talk about board process. Monthly Feedback Boardmembers appreciate the heads up. Discuss/Review Action Log Not done. Future Agenda Items Not done. Committee Reports Don Rodriguez attended the Cooper Slough field trip. He noted that it will be interesting to watch related development proposals. There is a mixed opinion regarding the vitality of the slough. Pawar extended an invitation to boardmembers who were unable to attend another chance to go. Review Council's Six Month Planning Calendar Not done. The meeting adjourned at 10:35 p.m. Nt'� 6