HomeMy WebLinkAboutNatural Resources Advisory Board - Minutes - 06/07/2000MINUTES
CITY OF FORT COLLINS
NATURAL RESOURCES ADVISORY BOARD
REGULAR MEETING
281 N. COLLEGE
June 7, 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, Don Rodriguez, Reagan Waskom, Bill Miller, Nate Donovan,
Phil Murphy
Board Members Absent
Jan Rastall, Randy Fischer, Rick Harness
Staff Present
Natural Resources Dept: Mark Sears, Terry Klahn, Karen Manci, Brian Woodruff
CPES: Tom Vosburg
Guests
Sally Craig, Planning and Zoning Board
Agenda Review
— Report on Nix field trip
— Mark Sears suggested adjourning to an executive session for land acquisition
updates.
Fossil Creek Reservoir Resource Management Plan, Jana McKenzie, EDAW
McKenzie said a lot of mapping of resources was completed. Some were mapped in the
Fossil Creek Area Plan, which set the parameters for the natural resource area. We
looked at vegetation and wildlife, the critical ones that drove decisions were existing
stands of trees, prairie dogs, and other waterfowl and wildlife that use the water and
coves.
Discussion
• Donovan: What kind of methods were not taken from the area plan? Data and
observations from the Division of Wildlife, and a prairie dog colony was not mapped.
• Donovan: Was that mapping done from direct observation? Some yes, but we also
use bona fide studies. We had several years in a row in which we had hired a
biologist to watch eagles during the winter and see which trees they were using.
Natural Resources Advisory B _ d
June 7, 2000
Page 2
The water quality is Class 2, non body contact, which disallows any boating use.
Currently there is boating, but it's a private use. Land use alternatives were presented at a
public meeting. Alternatives discussed included trail development, public access and
wildlife access. After we came up with the plan we designated management zones.
Donovan: How big is the amphitheater? It's for about 50 people. It's for educational
purposes, not for rock concerts.
Page 1-1
• Ohlson: We need to keep this in perspective, experts have been quoted as saying this
is key wildlife habitat, and a very special place. We need to treat this area differently
than other areas that we allow more use on.
• Donovan: It looks like there's access to the eastern edge of Duck Lake. There will be
a parking lot and viewing area.
• Miller: Who manages that? The County will manage everything, except for what's
owned by the City.
• Donovan: If there's going to be public access, what's the relationship between the
intensity of use as opposed to the parking area south of the reservoir? Is it anticipated
that people will be all over that area? The County's intent is to have people restricted
to a certain viewing area, similar to our observatory.
• Craig: My concern is that the parking lot is 300' away, and people can still go fifteen
feet beyond that. This area is more valuable than Cooper Slough.
• Olson: There shouldn't be a combination of governmental bodies coming up with a
buffer of less than 300'. There needs to be more than the bare minimum. There's a
lot of information out regarding flushing distances.
• Miller: I view that lake quite often. The birds are very un-tolerant. These are wild
populations. So, you'd like to see the parking lot closer to the road, and the viewing
area as far away as possible.?
• Waskom: Will the birders get what they need?
• Miller: Yes, you can see the entire lake from there.
• Ohlson: My suggestion would be to rethink the placement of that lot.
Page 1-2
• Ohlson: There's no representative from the environmental community. No matter
how decent the DOW people are, they're not representing the environmental
community. There should have been a mailing for a special meeting for the
environmental community, they're just as important as everyone else. There's even a
coalition of environmental groups now, it's the Northern Colorado Environmental
Alliance.
Page 2-1
• Ohlson: Why is it that the new agreement possibly includes the City of Fort Collins?
I would hope the City of Fort Collins would be involved.
Natural Resources Advisory Board
June 7,2000
Page 3
Page 2-2
• Ohlson: When it comes to conservation easements now, people just glaze over. I just
received information from Boulder about how they handle them. They flush it out. I
hope things are laid out so that there are rational and appropriate management
practices that do the least harm to wildlife. It's not a matter of saying it's agricultural,
we can request certain things.
• Ohlson: Is 12 feet the standard for a regional trail? If it's 12 feet, let's not say 10-12,
let's say 12. 1 don't know for sure, but I think it was 10 feet, but now it's 12.
• Ohlson: The map needs to be clean, I have a hard time distinguishing the colors.
We've talked to the drafter.
• Donovan: What's on Co. Rd. 32, north of Duck Lake? That's the sanitation district.
• Waskom: Where's the discharge? Right into the lake.
2-3
• Ohlson: When are we going to address issues caused by dogs and cats, runoff from
people keeping their lawns like golf courses. These things affect the resources. Some
issues are addressed in management areas. In reading this it also mentions gaps in
the fence. I'm worried, we'll lose battles if what we end up with is fraudulent. I want
to know if we'll have a chance to weigh in on these issues.
• Miller: The County's animal task force has presented to the Board of
Commissioners. When it comes to domestic cats, they don't know what to do.
• Rodriguez: I would suggest that you look at innovative strategies for managing the
area. Why not a land steward that is employed by the HOA to manage and maintain
the buffer area. I've got 3000 students that would be interested in a position like that.
• Ohlson: That part of the resource was supposed to be protected. People forget their
responsibilities after they get the good stuff. Maybe some guidelines on being a more
responsible land owner might be appropriate.
Page 2-4
• Ohlson: Is there a plan to clean up the water. No, people will notice there's
something different about the water. We don't know what will happen.
Page 2-6
• Ohlson: Again, they mention this is a very special place.
Page 2-7
• Ohlson: This page refers to the National Resource Conservation Service, and payment
to farmers for the retirement of marginal crop land. Is this a 10-year program, or is it
a different program, is it permanent? It's not permanent.
• Miller: The acquisition has not taken place from the State Land Board. If it is
acquired the County could vote for re -vegetation. There's an existing farmer who has
been paid to re -vegetate.
• Ohlson: Retirement to the average reader means forever.
• Donovan: Change the wording from "retirement" to "temporary set -aside of
marginal....: '.
Natural Resources Advisory L A
June 7, 2000
Page 4
Page 2-9
• Ohlson: I hope everyone has the Handbook for Trail Planners. Flushing occurs at a
greater distance if someone is with a dog.
• Miller: The flushing distance is the last response. They primarily go into a stop
feeding, more agitated condition, then they flush. It's the ultimate disturbance, it can
interrupt breeding behaviors and proper nutrition.
Page 2-11
• Ohlson: These population figures are wrong.
Page 3-2
• Rodriguez: You speak to wildlife in all but the high use areas. Maybe there should be
a statement with respect to wildlife in the high use areas too.
• Ohlson: Need to be careful not to go in with more use, and try to crank it down. In
the Restoration Area it says visitors need to stay on designated trails. That implies
that you don't have to in other areas. That should be in all zones.
• Donovan: Is there supposed to be a trail corridor along the north shore? No, not on
the north shore.
Page 3-3
• Ohlson: Why does the road need to be a paved surface, is it the fire service? No, the
decision was based on maintenance and accessibility, it needs to be an all-weather
surface.
• Ohlson: Is the trail as environmentally friendly as possible? With the alternatives and
the amount of land, it was a nice balance. Why not go to something other than
asphalt. It's not just the environmental stuff, it makes it less urban feeling, and there
are aesthetic issues. Take ten minutes and make sure that decision is right.
• Rodriguez: If you look at Lory State Park, the decision was made not to pave the
road. There's a primitive experience you can get at Lory that you can't get at Boyd
Lake. This is a special application of the natural areas perspective. We'll look at it
and re -discuss with the County.
• Craig: There should not be asphalt. I can't believe this, we're taking the most
sensitive area, and putting in asphalt. I would like to see this board take a strong
stand on this.
• Ohlson: We're giving feedback tonight. We'll be passing things on later as a group.
• Ohlson: I'm assuming we're paving to provide some ease of disabled access. Yes, but
it doesn't have to be a trail you can land an airplane on.
• Rodriguez: The standard ADA trail is 60".
• Ohlson: The trails need to be appropriate, but not any bigger than appropriate. Maybe
some small tables at the shoreline for people to sit and write, or sketch, if it would fit
and be appropriate.
Natural Resources Advisory Board
June 7, 2000
Page 5
Page 3-5
• Ohlson: You're not talking about Rolland Moore type picnic shelters are you? No,
more like a county one, with one table.
• Donovan: It seemed like a lot, but if it's four shelters that only have one table that's
different. If you only have tables, why do you need pads. Accessibility.
• Miller: Think about de-emphasizing picnicking and provide more smaller scale
benches.
• Rodriguez: Add an area of primitive recreation. It would be ok to have 2-3 sites that
don't have accessible trails to them.
• Donovan: Is the amphitheater really necessary? It seems like demand could drive
development of that, rather than putting in before there is a demand.
• Sears: It's a big need right now. I'd like to see some in our larger natural areas.
• Rodriguez: Have you considered doing berming?
Page 3-6
• Ohlson: We need to be careful with the fencing. There's a lot of new information
about the impact of fencing on wildlife. We must make sure to minimize the negative
impact on wildlife.
Page 3-7
• Craig: Why will there be lighting in the parking areas? They are for maintenance and
security. There is no need.
Page 3-8
• Ohlson: Why do we allow fishing, when humans are not allowed on the water due to
poor water quality? And, if we are going to allow it, it ought to be the perfect place
and opportunity to speak to responsible fishing. I don't get why we have to allow
fishing there at all.
• Rodriguez: You'd be setting up for failure if you're allowing access, but not allow
people to fish.
• Miller: You've got to draw the line somewhere. Not every area is appropriate for a
plethora of uses. You'll have line on the shore, and birds tangled in it.
• Ohlson: Will fishing be allowed on the whole shore line? I can't go off trail to view
wildlife, but they can go off to fish?
• Miller: It's probably easier to deny that use to begin with, than to change it after it's
established. It's better to drop fishing off the agenda.
• Donovan: Can you prohibit fishing in places that are sensitive, but not totally prohibit
it?
• Waskom: Is there a strong motivation for fishing? There will be, fishing may not be
an incompatible use.
• Miller: Maybe there should be appropriate seasonal closures for fisherman, as well as
other visitors.
• Ohlson: Why are we allowing dogs on the loop trail? This is a special area. They're
allowed on the regional trail, I don't see why we have to allow them on the loop trail.
Natural Resources Advisory L _d
June 7,2000
Page 6
Page 3-15
• Ohlson: It needs to be clear that privately owned doesn't mean unused, and
undeveloped doesn't mean "no impact".
• Ohlson: If we're going to be buying down development, the management plans we
talked about need to be developed. If we offer incentives to make improvements
there must be agreements on agriculture practices, dogs and cats. We need to make
sure it's not without any responsibility on their end.
LUTRAQ - VMT Reduction Action Plan, Tom Vosburg
Vosburg said the purpose of tonight's presentation is to review the preliminary report,
and provide a heads -up on the course of action. Proposing to begin work on establishing
work plans.
Discussion
• Murphy: In the problem statement we're talking about VMT, but there are no
numbers.
• Donovan: How lengthy is the Mobility Report Card? It measures a wide variety of
items.
• Ohlson: I'm really pleased to see that one of the things you're talking about is to
update the population forecast. We can have different values, but we have to be
straightforward and honest in the information.
• Miller: There should be some numbers in the statement of the problem. I would have
an objection to the goal if it is not set high enough. We should try to get the VMT
growth below the population growth. That goal is adopted policy. That would be a
policy debate. What we're talking about here are action plans.
• Ohlson: I agree that in the other documents those numbers are clear. Why was the
decision made to not include them in the this? We were trying to do a concise
executive summary. It would be easy to add a sentence like "adopted policy of VMT
growth and population growth should be equal".
Page 2
• Donovan: Are there parameters on what the funding can be used for? Would it be a
violation of federal laws to set some aside for alternative modes? Some
transportation funding is earmarked for certain things. This recommendation is that
we need an action plan for figuring out how to get long term funding for alternative
modes. The idea is to plug the holes not funded by existing transportation funding.
• Ohlson: You might want to exclude the little jokes in the council packets.
Page 3
• Donovan: Is there a way to briefly illustrate in the document what is meant by the
NIlvIBY syndrome? Dispelling the myths is important. There is no magic bullet.
• Ohlson: The myth has been created that as soon as we time the signal lights all will be
well. Traffic will only get worse, what we can do is minimize the speed of it
worsening.
0
Natural Resources Advisory Board
June 7, 2000
Page 7
• Donovan: Can you give us some examples of number 4, Internal policy conflicts?
There are more connections in projects than there used to be. If there are more
connections there are more opportunities for alternative modes, volume drops and
traffic is dispersed better. It does require you to drive a bit slower. Land Use Code
and Utility standards conflict. There are internal policy conflicts but we trying not to
raise a red flag.
• Waskom: If I didn't know better I would think that reducing VMT is a goal, it's
really only an indication in terms of monitoring. There's been discussion, is the
VMT goal the right way to measure what we're trying to get at? We don't want to be
perceived as backing away from it. We can also measure congestion, but it is
spongier. 1 feel like we're doing well with the significant things, there are
incremental changes.
• Ohlson: You want the policy decision makers to know why VMT is an issue.
• Miller: Somewhere in this document it needs to be stated that VMT is not necessarily
the only issue, we need to plan our trips.
• Woodruff: That point is well taken, we have focused on where are the action gaps,
rather than focusing on explaining the issue.
• Vosburg: My sense is that the issue of asking if VMT if the right measure is a
different question. So far the staff team has not contemplated trying to work on that.
We're working on implementation.
• Ohlson: There will be a time when air quality will take a dive. Right now you can
show VMT going up, and air pollution going down. We have to explain why VMT's
are important to reduce using these other things. VMT emerged as an air quality
issue in the early 90's. In the policy plan for air quality, reducing VMT is part of the
air quality goal. Congestion is the number one issue that people call the City
Mangaer about. We have a policy in place, the City's job is to try to modify the
citizens travel behaviors. So many different departments have a role, this project is
about pulling together, and accountability for the overall task of reducing VMT
growth.
• Donovan: The City should be a leader and set an example in the measure in number
8. In particular, travel pricing measures, employees paying for parking, and
incentives for trip reduction.
• Ohlson: The City built a parking structure, the original proposal was 100% of
employee parking would be covered. Before the City tells me what to do, they should
stop building parking structures to provide free parking. The City is saying one thing
and doing another.
• Miller: We should be reducing VMT, not the growth of VMT.
• Ohlson: We all agree philosophically, but you lose credibility if it's unachievable.
• Miller: If you set the goal too low, you won't accomplish anything.
• Ohlson: Affluence has played a role, the number of people having cars. It turns out
that one of the best indicators of the family is expendable income. If the income goes
up, there's an increase in miles.
• Donovan: What is pay -at -the -pump insurance? It would need state legislation to
implement. Insurance is included in the price of gas, the amount you pay in
insurance premiums disappears. That sends an economic signal to the consumer.
Natural Resources Advisory L A
June 7, 2000
Page 8
Schaaf Conservation Easement Exchange, Mark Sears
Sears distributed a map and said the proposal is to sell Schaaf's 38 acres with a
conservation easement in exchange for 24 acres of their land with a conservation
easement and $56,000. What we've done is determined the values of the parcel, before
and after the conservation easement to determine the actual values the City and Schaaf's
will receive.
The stewardship plan would be required to be reviewed no less than every five years.
This plan has been worked on for quite a few years. There are ten acres for future home
sites. They may decide that's not feasible and may want to include that ten acres in the
exchange.
Discussion
• Waskom: They could sell later if they chose, but it would go with a conservation
easement? They could sell as long as it's not developed.
• Miller: What wildlife values are we giving up? It's a pretty degraded site, non-
native grasses, a little wetland, it's not high quality. It's been grazed and abused in
the past. There are not species of concern, or any high wildlife use.
• Waskom: Is this a done deal? No.
The stewardship goals are:
1. Enhance wildlife habitat, no public recreation use.
2. Plan to fence different pastures, no pasture would be smaller than five acres.
3. Fence the area along Harmony Road where the pond is.
4. No horses in the wetland.
5. No billboards or other ads. (One site identification sign for their facility)
6. The area would become certified as a natural area (private).
7. Control noxious weeds on pastures.
8. Only native species would be planted.
9. Remove Russian Olive trees.
10. Keep some of the dead standing wood for perch sites.
11. Trim branches for safety issues.
12. Remove trash and debris.
13. Remove old interior wooden fence. They would not use barbed wire. They would
use smooth wire, and may request a variance for electric wire.
14. Level out dirt piles.
15. Remove old shed.
• Miller: Will this be a trade of a conservation easement for the use of the land? It's a
sale of the land with a conservation easement.
• Ohlson: I'm leery about parting with land unless I think it's a really good deal. These
agreements are very important. I have some concern about the future home sites.
The City organization is not a very good negotiator.
• •
Natural Resources Advisory Board
June 7, 2000
Page 9
• Waskom: To say that weeds will be controlled is not enough. Want to restrict the
types of herbicides that can be used. Boulder lists the actual products.
• Ohlson: I've pulled articles about fencing. It's becoming an issue.
• Waksom: How could this be construed as a natural area, that's a huge stretch? The
whole natural area certification program is to promote the planting of native plants.
• Ohlson: These things are so complex, the amount of time being spent is huge. Rome
is burning and we're certifying a horse pasture. It's been a very low priority, we've
been working on it as we have time. I want to make sure we're not losing other things.
We need to buy key parcels now.
• Waskom: I don't care much about this. I would like you to bring parcels that have
some wildlife benefits.
• Ohlson: I want us to give our input on details of the management plan. People need
to speak up.
• Murphy: We need to have a discussion of stewardship plans in general. It seems to
me the natural areas sub -committee needs to have a discussion.
• Sears: I would suggest we take the next month to polish up the stewardship plan, and
bring this back, hopefully with little or no discussion.
• Rodriguez: We have a couple people who are experts in holistic range management.
Why not get a grad student out there with the new management plan and do some
monitoring. The Schaafs would probably be open to that.
• Ohlson: At the same meeting let's discuss the certification some more, it seems a
little strange to me.
Nix Maintenance Center, Mark Sears
Sears said he wanted to get feedback from those able to tour the site. There was an open
house. Three people showed up. They didn't have any problems with the proposal. We
have been asked to look at three other potential sites; 1) Resource Recovery Farm, 2)
Pickle factory site, and 3) Western Mobile on N. Taft Hill. The Resource Recovery
Farm facility is wonderful, but the location is poor. The LaFarge area is also poor since it
is on the east edge of the City and long distance from many of our natural areas.
• Ohlson: There was concern about how spread out the dog obedience area was. It
doesn't have to be the biggest and best on the planet. There is a huge net gain to the
police.
• Ohlson: It appeared to a number of us there may be over -kill on the size of office
spaces. I was also disturbed to hear that some people will chose to work there, and
others will chose not too. There are issues other than the site. The road is over -kill,
there can be good access without a twenty -foot paved road.
• Rodriguez: The centrality of the site is ideal. If it's done tastefully it could be a good
addition. I'm concerned about lighting and security. The biggest concern is cost.
• Waksom: Are there any concerns about the natural area, the wildlife?
• Miller: Is there any information on how the ponds are being utilized?
• Ohlson: We had concerns, there were seven to ten observations. As I recall, there
wasn't a "poison pill". Suggested moving the dogs up front, some things that were
going to be reversed.
Natural Resources Advisory L ;d
June 7, 2000
Page 10
• Rodriguez: If the police didn't opt to come to this site, would they remain at Bignall?
We really want them out of the Bignall site.
• Ohlson: We should provide good office sizes, but this has the potential of going over
that line. What seems large now, won't seem as big when there are twenty people out
there.
• Miller: From what I've heard, this may be the most appropriate site for the center.
• Waskom: What about the Pepsi building? It was used as a cost comparison, it ended
up costing more.
We're within a month of submitting to the development review process. We're hoping
that very soon we'd get approval to go ahead and submit. We're 18 months, at a
minimum, from submittal to moving out there.
• Ohlson: There's a bigger question. An expenditure of this amount of money at this
time has many ramifications and I'm not there yet. I need a lot of hand holding, I'm
probably further from it than when I started.
• Manci: Is the board comfortable with us going to submittal to get the process
moving?
• Sears: We won't submit before July 5, we will come back prior to submittal
• Miller: I don't see a problem with going ahead with submittal. (The board seemed to
approve.)
• Ohlson: I still have big issues that need to be worked on.
Review of Minutes:
May 3, 2000
Page 4, 8`h bullet, change to "Give it the appropriate amount of time, but at some time
take action.
Page 5, 71h bullet, change "Reagan to Waksom".
Committee Report
None
Announcements
Rodriguez: Received a call from Lance Freeman on the joint committee meeting with the
P&R Board, and voiced my displeasure at his selection. He told me he was going to put
together a memo with the names of the folks and get it moving in that direction.
• Ohlson: I thought we decided not to do this.
• Rodriguez: People were opposed, I thought we were ambushed.
• Miller: The benefit of a joint meeting would be listening to the view of each board.
• Murphy: I don't want to see it come to the point that compromises are being made. I
don't want a unified voice going to Council on some of these issues. Each board is a
separate entity with a separate look at what they're doing.
• Ohlson: I would hope they would start to accept and understand some of our values.
• •
Natural Resources Advisory Board
June 7, 2000
Page 11
Cooper Slough: Board of County Commissioners denied the applicant based on the sound
scientific evidence. The applicant withdrew the project. Applicant can come back, but
would have to come back under new land code. It will probably come back when there is
change of the composition of the Board of County Commissioners.
Review Future Agenda Items
June 21, 2000: Parks Management Plan
Fort Collins/Loveland Water Line — Coyote Ridge
So. Taft Hill Road Project
July 5, 2000: Schaaf Conservation Easement
Nix Maintenance Center — Alternate Sites
The board changed the June 21 meeting from a work session to a special meeting of the
NRAB.
New Business
Ohlson
• Howes outfall ponds were never built. We need follow through to make sure we're
getting answers in a timely manner. Shoemaker didn't know the ponds weren't done.
• Conservation easement agreements are going to be an issue — guidelines and
management plans.
• Discuss fence design and it's impact on wildlife
■ Was there NRD presence at the community meeting on pets? Was any information
sent?
• Was someone from NRD plugged into the xeriscape plan?
■ Would still like to get a copy of the Sauer conservation easement agreement.
Waskom
• How does the City maintain the buildings and grounds? It's strange that the grass is
cut so short.
Adjourn
The meeting adjourned to executive session at 10:35 to discuss land acquisitions.