Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutNatural Resources Advisory Board - Minutes - 01/19/2000r1 MINUTES CITY OF FORT COLLINS NATURAL RESOURCES ADVISORY BOARD SPECIAL MEETING 281 N. COLLEGE January 19, 2000 For Reference: Randy Fischer, NRAB Chair - 491-6303 Bill Bertschy, Council Liaison - 484-0181 Tom Shoemaker, Staff Liaison - 221-6263 Board Members Present Randy Fischer, Kelly Ohlson, Don Rodriguez, Jan Rastall Phil Murphy, Rick Harness, Reagan Waskom, Nate Donovan, Bill Miller Board Members Absent None Staff Present Natural Resources Dept: Terry Klahn, Mark Sears, Tom Shoemaker, Karen Manci Guests Sally Craig, Planning and Zoning Board Agenda Review No changes. Review and Approval of Minutes November 17, 1999 Page 4. 1' full bullet: change "on the Cottonwood Hollow issue" to "on the Cottonwood Glen Park site issue" Page 2. Yd bullet from bottom: change "water quality protection monitoring" to "water quality protection and monitoring" Page 4. bottom of pace: change "viewed as an obstacle and opponent' to "I now view the department as an obstacle and opponent' The minutes were unanimously approved as modified. December 1. 1999 The minutes were unanimously approved as written. Council 6-month planning calendar 1. Ohlson suggested ensuring there are appropriate timeframes for Board discussions regarding the Flood Plain amendments. 2. February 1, 2000 — Pay -As -You -Throw (Tom Shoemaker said this would probably be postponed to a later date) Natural Resources AdvisL,_,, Board January 19, 2000 Page 2 Horticulture Center 3. Study Session — Boards & Commissions ACTION LOG & TICKLER LIST 1. Best Management Practices — This has been continually moved back, keep pressure on folks dealing with storm water runoff. 2. Kelly Ohlson would like a copy of the 1996 or 1997 memo concerning acquisition priorities for natural areas. Tom Shoemaker will get this memo. Committee Reports Solid Waste: The committee met January 10, 2000. The committee had a dialogue with Janelle Henderson about the Solid Waste Task Force and it's recommendations. There were also questions about the future of the County landfill. In 2000 they will spend $600,000 to expand the floor space of the recycling center. They would like to get another bailer if they can get the financing. Natural Areas: The committee met January 12. Mark Sears talked about alternatives to the Fort Collins/Loveland Water Districts proposal to site water tanks on Coyote Ridge. Originally the plan was to meet with the consultants from Nolte. It isn't clear if they are looking at other sites. Olson said we need clarification from the attorney's office on the City's position on easements. Mark Sears said the appropriateness of selling off a portion of the property on E. Mulberry was discussed. Shoemaker added that it's been communicated to the people who made the proposal the answer is probably no. Announcements Shoemaker: Had a great meeting with the FIDOS group. Mike Powers, Greg Byrne and Mary Hefferman were in attendance, and agree that they won't be in the natural areas, existing parks, or the trails system. There is the possibility of areas in new parks. There is a seventeen acre site that Connel Resources has agreed to donate that has little natural resource value. NRD will take the lead in finalizing the donation, and Parks will manage the site in the future. Natural Areas Program Mark Sears gave a brief overview of the updated plan. Long Range Plan Discussion • Ohlson: Background, Page 1: It says there was approximately 17 million dollars generated. We should have the exact number, was this rounding just for report purposes? • Miller: Would there be any value to include what the projected revenue was at the beginning and have a comparison? • Harness: Need more information about how the stewardship fund will be set up, a ballpark as to what is needed to meet the projections and what we have to do without today. • Rodriguez: Even just a percentage figure of those dollars. Natural Resources Advisory Board January 19, 2000 Page 3 • Shoemaker: Each and every one of the ballot measures are clear that the funds were to be spent for long term maintenance, it has been planned from the beginning. We need to understand that this is the plan for assuring long-term maintenance. • Miller: Have there been any contributions to date? • Shoemaker: No, the reason is we have been, and we are continuing to place a strong emphasis on acquisitions. We feel land acquisition needs to be the top priority. The longer we put off stewardship the better, as long as we don't blow it. • Fischer: General comments on the 2"d page of the Long Range Action Plan. I take exception to the last paragraph. I don't want to see us limit our program to what the HPOS tax will give us. I have a vision of going way above and beyond that program, maybe another referendum. I'm not satisfied with the money we'll get from HPOS. It bothers me that we are basically saying that we are satisfied, and we're not going to dream or have a vision. • Sears: Budget projections are based on 1999 dollars, even at a 3% increase those expenses are going to go up 170% between now and 2018. It could be a limiting or misleading statement. • Shoemaker: Public demand has dramatically increased over the last seven years, and will continue to do so. We have to react to adopted plans and policies. If there are directions we need to go, that's something we should talk about later in more depth. • Ohlson: It's adopted policy the BCC overage goes to natural areas. Others in that category have gotten the overage, plus interest. We've lost that, but laid the groundwork for the big pot. I would like to see that added. • Ohlson: See that we still have a balance of three million, that seems low. I have heard five million. • Sears: With the closure on the Hazaleus property, and others, it should be correct. • Ohlson: I would like to see the breakdown of the 4.7 million, it seems astronomical. • Miller: Do you want the breakout included in this document? This is why some of us got onto this board to begin with. • Waskom: I would rather see what is being spent per acre, rather than the whole lump sum. • Ohlson: We need to find middle ground. We don't need to over -react the other way. • Rastall: I was personally discouraged when I saw that 2.3 million was used in education. There needs to be focus and priority for educating people to care about what we're accumulating. • Sears: We agree, that's an aspect of the program that is evolving. • Ohlson: We have to put this in perspective. We started generating dollars in 1993, this program is an infant. I want more money for education too, but it's about getting the land first. We've got to get the land. • Shoemaker: What we're all trying to get to is the right balance. An education program might prompt real interest. • Craig: Education is a great avenue to use volunteers, that's how the DOW does it all. • Shoemaker: That's the strategy we've used. • Ohlson: If we had the right people on Council it would be funded from the General Fund. We're not getting these kinds of monies. Natural Resources Advisor y Board January 19, 2000 Page 4 • Ohlson: There needs to be clarification on the section concerning the 17,700 acres that need to be protected. I would stay away from saying 17,000 in the report. • Rodriguez: Maybe a small table or graph would clearly differentiate the areas. • Ohlson: On page 3, is $15,000 for the Natural Areas Enhancement Fund enough? • Manci: It's been enough so far, we may need to add to the pile in the future. • Shoemaker: Your point is well taken. So far the supply has met the demand. Some of these projects are self limiting, there's just so much they can do. • Miller: In the last paragraph under Restoration and Enhancement needs, replace the word "demands" with "requests". • Ohlson: Does the acquisition money end at 2008? • Sears: We're presenting a vision that says we'll acquire another 5000 acres. If the vision grows, then additional acquisitions will be made. We would have acquired all of the land that we are projecting to acquire by the end of the year 2008. • Shoemaker: We don't have an undefined universe. It's adopted plans and policies of the City of Fort Collins. If the landscape increases, then there's the need for more acquisitions. • Fischer: On page four, one of the things that struck me was the emphasis on paved bike trails, even the fact of having a separate section bothers me. I've always assumed the paved bike trail program as a Parks program. What I see happening there is a Parks program, and we're taking responsibility. • Shoemaker: I'm starting to hear noise from Council members and P&R board members and staff. The ballot measure says natural areas and trails programs. Since this is a long range plan it is appropriate to ask how the funding is going versus the needs for regional trails programs. • Fischer: I've used paved trails a lot, and they are a great amenity. I'm not against paved trails. I don't remember a priority for the natural areas program to build paved bike trails. What does a paved bike trail cost? About $40 to$50 a lineal foot. • Shoemaker: Up to this point it has not been a priority at all. It's an issue that is a political one from a lot of different perspectives. • Ohlson: It's apiece of the puzzle. $100,000 a year is a small price to pay in the big picture. Ina decade that's one million out of $150 million. Don't get me wrong, I agree with Randy. We do have to take the opportunity to say how important proper trail placement is. • Fischer: They want more of our money all of the time. • Harness: How much money was spent last year. I've never seen that big of a mistake in a final memo. It's missing $800,000. • Shoemaker: The conservation trust used to be spent on open space and trails. Now it's mostly dedicated to trails, so it's balanced out. The projections are that lottery funds are going to decrease because of advertising policies. • Ohlson: Continue to meet the intent of the ballot language, but soften the language. For natural areas staff to not remain actively involved in the planning and construction is not acceptable. I want you guys to be involved in the regional planning and placement of trails. I have more confidence here than in Greeley and Weld County. Natural Resources Advisory Board • January 19, 2000 Page 5 • Fischer: Page 5, Education and Enforcement — It was a year ago the Pineridge kiosks were put up, and there's still no message on the kiosk. That sends a message to the public that we don't really care. There's no information about what you can and cannot do, no information about rules and regulations. The dog signs are up, but no one follows the rules. We need to do a better job of educating people of the value of natural areas, it's their land, and they need to take care of it. • Sears: These are bare bone budgets for maintenance, education and enforcement. They depend greatly on volunteer efforts. In education we have one full-time person and part of another. In maintenance we have five people, 4 full time in the field and one crew leader. Four people to maintain 5000 acres. We are depending on volunteer groups. They are essential to our program. • Ohlson: I would rather have another person making sure developments follow city codes and buffers when going through the development process, than another'/2 FTE in education and an additional ranger. What are we giving up by doing that? Is this person doing the work of three people? • Shoemaker: Kim is funded 100% from the General Fund. She spends a lot of time on natural areas issues. • Ohlson: I would love to have this person come for a half-hour work session. I'm not convinced we need another ranger. We need to talk about that again. I'm twigged about the mounted ranger for a variety of reasons. My guess is someone wants to do that. • Fischer: Mobility is much greater on a bike, and the cost is substantial. • Rodriguez: Mounted patrols are not very cost effective, it's more charismatic. • Shoemaker: Do you have stats you could share on that? • Sears: It would require some clothing changes, otherwise it's a very nominal cost. It would be a pilot project. • Ohlson: On page six, right above Policy and Site Planning, need to remove the word "wonderful" from, "we have a wonderful volunteer program", we need to be consistent with no editorializing. • Rodriguez: Referring to the last page and the possible need for additional policy and site planning development staff, has there been any thought on contracting out project by project, rather then hiring a staff person. • Shoemaker: If you're thinking about development review, we're beginning a process of trying to assess where we are. We've done a lot of shifting. When we hired Kim we thought it would be about 60/40, but the need is 100%. The thing we have the most concern about is not the review of plans. I don't leap to new positions, and have been criticized for not leaping fast enough. Tom Shoemaker and Mark Sears reviewed maps which outlined parcels in different regions in the community. Each parcel was studied to determine the conservation need. Different types of conservation tools were considered, and the areas were prioritized into three categories: 1) Critical, 2) Important, and 3) Low. Natural Resources Adviso.y Board January 19, 2000 Page 6 McKee Property Lease Mark Sears said this property had been leased until about six months ago for wheat farming. The County has been negotiating with Harry Sauer to farm Longview and McKee, and have a lease put together. The lease would renew annually, as long as neither party terminated the lease. The terms are the tenant would receive 100% of the income off the crop and would pay for fertilizing, harvesting and seed, and we would pay for 33% of the expense of getting rid of weeds. We would have an ongoing expense for our share of weed and pest control. • Ohlson: How do you know this is a good lease? There is no other deal. This is the only farmer interested in this site. • Ohlson: It should be good for the earth too, are there pesticides? These questions need to be asked. We can explore that and rewrite the lease if necessary. The lease can be terminated with 90 days notice, he can cancel the lease as well. • Rodriguez: How many acres do we have in our program that are agricultural lands? This property and the Longview farm. • Harness: Why can't we just let it grow? This property has been farmed and its been in crop. If you no longer crop it, it will be cultivating weed seeds. We would have to do a lot of control. It would be ideal to go into there and seed in native grasses, but it would be very expensive. We're wanting to get more experience in restoration before we tackle a site such as this. • Ohlson: I agree with the approach. Eventually it should be natural prairie. If we don't have the money to do this, we have to stop saying we have enough money. • Fischer: I'm glad you got the reciprocal termination agreement in there. Motion: Move that the NRAB recommends adoption of staffs support of the proposed lease between the City's Natural Resources Department and Harold Sauer, to lease the McKee property on a year to year basis as presented by staff. The motion passed unanimously. Motion: Move that the board retire to executive session to discuss natural areas acquisitions. The motion passed unanimously. Adjournment The meeting adjourned at 10:30 p.m.