Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutNatural Resources Advisory Board - Minutes - 09/20/2000MINUTES CITY OF FORT COLLINS NATURAL RESOURCES ADVISORY BOARD SPECIAL MEETING 281 N. COLLEGE September 20, 2000 For Reference: Randy Fischer, NRAB Chair - 491-6303 Bill Bertschy, Council Liaison - 484-0181 Tom Shoemaker, Staff Liaison - 221-6263 Board Members Present Kelly Ohlson, Phil Murphy, Reagan Waskom, Bill Miller, Nate Donovan, Linda Knowlton Board Members Absent Randy Fischer, Don Rodriguez Staff Present Natural Resources Dept: Tom Shoemaker, Terry Klahn, Karen Manci • Advance Planning: Timothy Wilder Guests Sally Craig, Planning and Zoning Board Bonnie Pierce Jana McKenzie, EDAW Agenda Review Kelly Ohlson would like to provide a quick summary of the walk-through at Lee Martinez Park. Fossil Creek Reservoir Resource Management Plan, Jana McKenzie, EDAW McKenzie said this plan had been taken to the Latimer County Open Lands Board. It was adopted with certain conditions that are included in the revision of the plan this board received. • Ohlson: Are there things of significance that we brought up during the last discussion that are not included in this revision? We put together a memo about the concerns from the last meeting and used it as an outline. There may have been some editorial comments, but for the most part I think everything is covered. • Ohlson: In #2, where it says the buffer should be greater than 300'. It says "This may not be possible", if it is possible, than why wouldn't we do that. That statement doesn't say it's prohibited, our goal is access. The County doesn't want the parking lot right next to the road. Natural Resources I., Asory Board September 20, 2000 Page 2 • Ohlson: It could end up greater than 300', and not necessarily be right next to the road. It's really a site design issue. • Ohlson: How do we define paved? Are the pavers at CFP considered paved? The budget in the plan goes for asphalt. • Manci: The pavers are not durable. The County will want asphalt, but by City Code you could have pavers. • Ohlson: It says we won't pave until it's been analyzed. The last thing you want is to design for the ease of maintenance. People in charge of maintenance shouldn't be dictating design. • Miller: I want to revisit the 300' buffer. We've already addressed the flushing distances of certain species. There are stress levels prior to flushing. Why not move the parking lot further to the east, but leave the entry way where it is. There's screening and blinds, to screen movement so you're not flushing at the edges. • Donovan: There won't be a lot of screening, it won't be like Fossil Creek. We have to provide a balance. Some people can see things from far away, but others aren't coming with that kind of equipment. We have to provide some type of balance. • How close is the regional trail to Duck Lake? It's on the other side of the road. • Craig: When you were talking about flushing distances at Cooper Slough you're talking about the ground. With waterfowl coming down to a lake, sometimes screening isn't the panacea you're making it out to be. We'll have to see if they continue to use Duck Lake because of the encroachment. • Shoemaker: There's been planning, people are being directed to a certain area. Right now people are pulling off everywhere. It's been carefully designed, this should work well. • Ohlson: Is it a fact the Riddel property is under contract? Yes, and the trail has been moved. • Ohlson: What's the size of the road in #3 under Fossil Creek Reservoir Park Preserve? I believe it's 24 feet, two 12 foot lanes. It might be 22 feet. • Ohlson: We should do whatever we can to get it reasonable. The paving makes sense, but I'm not happy with the Fire Authority doing park and urban design. We have to make it so you can get turned around, that will have met most of the fire department criteria. • Craig: Is this open at night? No. • Ohlson: I'm for appropriate access for the disabled community. We should do what we believe is right, but we shouldn't hide behind the ADA that isn't enforced anywhere in the City. Half of the buildings in this City aren't accessible. Natural surfaces can meet the requirements. If there are structural problems there may need to be paved surfaces. • Donovan: That's a trail design issue, you don't design trails where you have those problems. • Ohlson: #5 — Overall I'm pretty happy with this. The word balance is overrated. Why can't we see what the usage is and design more picnic areas if they're needed. It could be adapted over a several year period. That's a good point. We don't want to come back and have a battle to add a few tables. Natural Resources Advisory Board • September 20, 2000 Page 3 • Ohlson: I don't see it that way. You could have a plan that said up to this amount of picnic tables, but do it over a phasing period. • Shoemaker: They (Latimer County Open Space) didn't mind the density. I don't think phasing would be a problem. • Miller: The bigger you make it the larger crowd you will draw. • Ohlson: It doesn't make sense to do nine right off. I don't think anyone will mind if we do phased construction based on demonstrated demand, we'll ask. • Ohlson: Did anyone ever talk about 2-person tables? I'd still like them to consider them. Not everyone needs a picnic table for eight people. Need to move away from the "one size fits all" mentality. • Ohlson: #7 — Lighting — It should be state-of-the-art, within a reasonable price cost. We think one may be just fine. It's for someone to safely move across the parking lot. • Ohlson: My last comment is about the private land. We can do everything right here and have it trashed by not having appropriate things about the private land. I hope we're being careful and everything isn't being farmed out to the Latimer Land Trust. • Donovan: Conservation easements must have the ability and money behind them to be enforced. • Shoemaker: There's a reasonable level of clarity about what will and won't happen. As of today, Latimer County holds the easements that have been created. • Knowlton: It says the recreational lease expires in 2002, is that January? I think it might be at the end of Summer, 2002. • Manci: I think they have two more water seasons. Bill Miller made the following motion: Move the NRAB approve the Fossil Creek Reservoir Resource Management Plan of September, 2000 to include phased development of the facilities in the primary use area, and that enforcement mechanisms be included in the language of the conservation easements, and that the funding of the enforcement be provided by the appropriate enforcement agencies. Kelly Ohlson seconded the motion. The motion passed unanimously (6/0). Tom Shoemaker complimented EDAW on their work on this project. Shoemkaer said the Riddell property is under contract and will close next Friday. With respect to the State Land Board property we had to submit a bid, hopefully ours will be the only one. Hopefully by October 3 it will be final and formal. We had an excellent meeting about Duck Lake and have resolved the contractual issues. There is a remaining ten acres that we would love to get purchased. Latimer County is continuing to negotiate with that land owner. 0 Population Growth Review Project, Timothy Wilder Natural Resources A, , isory Board September 20, 2000 Page 4 This project is looking at the rate of population growth. It's part of the City Plan Monitoring Program, which is an outgrowth of City Plan. In the monitoring plan there are 17 indicators, 5 of which are considered "trigger" indicators. In the 1999 report the rate of population growth was shown to be 2.2%. We know that the growth rate has been higher which is a cause for concern. The past May, City Council asked that we move up our time frame for the special review process. Staff was directed to do a quick three month process. Also, we wanted to look at certain facilities and services, and how they are impacted by the higher growth rate. When we're talking about rate, we're not talking about growth in general. We're looking at what impact the growth rate is having, rather than the impacts of growth. We looked at several services, including transportation, affordable housing, utilities, police, cultural and library services, and recreational services, and analyzed the current funding sources. These were looked at in general levels of service currently, versus what the goals of service are. We could see there were some gaps. For example, capital improvement expansion fees; in certain areas we have a fee that's not in line with the adopted level of service. The basic component is we're not keeping up with the needs for that service in the future. Police Services has a level of service of 1.2 officers per 1000 people. However, the adopted level of service is 1.5 officers per 1000. There's a problem there in terms of the fees we collect. The more quickly we grow, the further behind we will fall in terms of revenue. We've talked to the State demographer and his feeling is it will continue. The jobs that will drive the growth will happen along the I-25 corridor because of the fact the Denver Metro area is running out of land. The State still stands by their 2.2% projection for the year 2015. • Donovan: What's the lag time between when development fees are collected and the Certificate of Occupancy? Street over -sizing doesn't feel that's an issue. They feel they're keeping up with new growth. We're not sure what will happen with sales and use tax in the future. There are a lot of factors that affect sales and use tax. The facilities we think will be affected the most are programs such as CDBG. It's tied to the population, however the funds are not increasing. The overall shares won't increase. • Ohlson: What other federal programs do we get, other than CDBG? Maybe transit funding, the FTA funding, that's tied to population, however I'm not sure about the overall mix. Wilder said other issues are air quality and traffic congestion. We anticipate there will be issues there with the rate of population growth. City Plan outlines what should happen overall in the system. If we don't keep up with the transit facilities, we'll have transit and air quality issues. Another thing is the land supply with a higher growth rate. The capacity of that supply is reached sooner. Natural Resources dvisory Board • September 20, 2000 Page 5 • Donovan: Do development fees increase with supply and demand? We have the ability to increase if we're providing a certain level of service, The gaps would have to be made up, and then we can charge a higher fee at a later time. • Miller: Any ideas of impact fees keeping up with the rate of inflation of construction costs? I've been told yes, but we don't have any figures. They've increased some of those, to reflect additional costs. • Ohlson: The City internal organization needs to get consistency. We looked at the numbers of some service areas, the look different than the population projections. In some sense it's nice that some service areas have taken the opportunity to anticipate higher growth rates. However, the fundamental issue is we need to make sure we use the same population growth rate every time. • Donovan: If you have one service anticipating high rates, when it's budget time, who gets more money? I'm not sure. What we did say is let's look at strategies far determining that. We'll be working as a region to update the projections. Most likely they will be higher than 2.2%. The second thing is we want to make sure these are understood and used by the various service areas and departments. Another thing is looking at a range of projections in the future and providing a higher level of service than is needed. We'll be looking at development fees in more detail, and assessing if they should be raised, and if so, how. • Ohlson: In the last bullet about existing deficiencies. At some point you have to get caught up, or at least start narrowing the gap. I'm assuming that's why that last bullet is in there. New development is not paying 100%, fees can only be recovered from things that are directly related. Existing residents pick up the rest of tab. In transportation numbers related to growth, the VMT numbers look bad. They're higher than the population growth. If growth paid a higher share it still might not keep up because of regional growth. It's a complicated issue. • Donovan: Do service areas come up with these numbers? How are they arrived at? They're based on projections used by the region. There are a lot of statistics in terms of how those are developed. They did economic forecasting, talked to the state demographer, and also looked at other numbers. We have to allocate those down to the jurisdictions and arrive at a projection for Fort Collins. • Ohlson: I hope when you talk to Council the thrust is not just on the rate of growth. The average person doesn't think of 2.2% or 2.5% as a large number. What impacts the quality of life are the real numbers. In the past the rate of growth has been higher, but the impact was lower. That's a hard concept to get to people. I really like the strategies and issues for future discussion. I hope you do all nine of them. • Ohlson: What are you looking for from Tuesday's council meeting? Are these the strategies they're looking for? Do they believe the strategies are appropriate? The board decided not to take any formal action on the this item at this time. Council Six Month Planning Calendar — Ohlson: Amendment 24 and 21 discussions have been rescheduled for October 17. — Shoemaker: Budget discussions are scheduled for September 26. Budget decisions to be made in October and November. Natural Resources I isory Board September 20, 2000 Page 6 — Shoemaker: December 12, Capital Improvement Plan Review Action Log Shoemaker will try to have this updated by the next meeting. Announcements — Craig: There will be a workshop on the relocation of Hwy 287, at the Holiday Inn on Mulberry from 4:00 p.m. to 7:00 p.m. One or two of you should attend. They're looking at relocating the Terry Lake Dam. I don't know if that will have any affect natural resource wise. — Ohlson: The end of September is the deadline for applying for positions on Boards and Commissions. — Ohlson: Will be on KCOL radio Thursday, September 21 from 8:20 a.m. to 9:30 a.m. to discuss the Responsible Growth Initiative. Questions will be taken from 9:00 am. to 9:30. — Miller: Thursday, September 28, John Fielder will debating Amendment 24 on Cross Currents. Then he will be giving a presentation at the Lincoln Center. Review Future Agenda Items October 4, 2000: Ranger Program Update Canal Importation Master Drainage Way Martinez Park Management Plan Natural areas easement policies — Shoemaker: Do you want to bring the Martinez Park Management Plan to the full board, or would you prefer a subcommittee from P&R and this board? — Ohlson: The meeting was productive. It was challenging from this board's perspective, both in behaviour, and the way things were being suggested. — Shoemaker: We're trying to get to consent. What's the best way to get there? — Ohlson: I like to move the Natural Areas Easement Policy review to when Randy is back. It would be good to have materials in advance. — Shoemaker: The reason I didn't have material for tonight is it's very rough cut. I was hoping tonight to listen to what people's thoughts are before we spend a lot of time crafting something. I would like to have Randy's thoughts. Could I have that as soon as possible so it can be factored in? — Waskom: What's your time line? — Shoemaker: Would like to have it to Council before the end of the year. There's a lot of urgency. — Donovan: Can Kelly and Randy schedule a meeting with Tom, and move this to the October 4 agenda? — Shoemaker: We may spend time at every meeting on this. — Murphy: Susie (Gordon) gave us the Annual Report on Solid Waste and volunteered to come talk to us about it. — Donovan: This has been in progress for a while, there are things that we felt she should talk about, such as how the numbers were arrived at. Natural Resources Board • September 20, 2000 Page 7 — Murphy: There are problems with the data. Shoemaker said staff has been trying to respond back to the Board better regarding their suggestions and ideas relating to different projects. — A Futures Committee meeting has been scheduled for 5:00 p.m., Wednesday, October 4. — Committee assignments and re -organization will be discussed at the October 4 regular meeting. — Natural Areas committee is scheduled to meet Tuesday, October 7, at noon. Adjournment The meeting adjourned at 8:30 p.m.