Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutNatural Resources Advisory Board - Minutes - 11/03/1999MINUTES CITY OF FORT COLLINS NATURAL RESOURCES ADVISORY BOARD REGULAR MEETING 281 N. COLLEGE November 3,1999 For Reference: Randy Fischer, NRAB Chair - 491-6303 Bill Bertschy, Council Liaison - 484-0181 Susie Gordon, Staff Liaison - 221-6265 Board Members Present Randy Fischer, Kelly Ohlson, Jan Rastall, Phil Murphy, Bill Miller, Nate Donovan Board Members Absent Rick Harness, Don Rodriguez, Reagan Waskom Staff Present Natural Resources Deg Tom Shoemaker, Susie Gordon, Mark Sears, Aaron Fodge, Sarah Fox CPES Admin: Patty Storm Guests Sally Craig, Planning and Zoning Board Phil Friedman, Cities for Climate Protection committee Agenda Review • New Issues & Concerns Roundtable — delay to November 17 • Solid Waste Resolution — to be presented on November 17 • Review of Natural Areas Work Plan— Ohlson suggested reviewing the work plan in detail and requested a copy of the latest version. • Bill Miller requested time to give an update on the November 13 joint meeting of the Larimer County EAB and the NRAB. Fischer suggested giving the update under announcements. Tom Shoemaker congratulated and thanked everyone for their hard work on the Open Space Tax initiative. Tom Shoemaker thanked Bill Miller, Phil Murphy and Randy Fischer for their efforts at the Coyote Ridge opening. Cities for Climate Protection Susie Gordon introduced Aaron Fodge who will be presenting a five minute recap of the Cities for Climate Protection process which will go to City Council on November 16. Natural Resources Advisory Board November 3, 1999 Page 2 Phil Friedman will then speak to the perspective of the citizen's committee, followed by time for questions and answers. Fodge commended Lucinda Smith for her work on this program and told the board he would like to update them on changes that have been made since June to the final draft plan. The first change, at Council's direction, is that measures were reorganized into the three categories; 1) Existing measures, 2) New measures, and 3) Pending measures. Secondly, we improved the quantification of cost and benefits of the new and pending measures. Every effort was made to quantify the costs and savings associated with the proposed new actions. It was not possible to estimate costs in all cases. Finally, several measures were dropped or modified. The three measures dropped were cleaner buses, transportation funding advisory committee recommendations, and mandatory recycling issues. The mandatory renewable measure that would seek comparable energy conservation measures was modified to address the electric industry in Colorado. If all of the new, existing and pending measures are fully implemented by 2010, it is estimated the city would be able to reduce greenhouse gas emissions 30% below the worst -case levels predicted for 2010. The City has more control over some actions than others. We especially encourage local emission reductions through education and waste reduction, and taking steps in City government to reduce emissions from municipal operations. The draft plan and resolution were routed to all Service Area Directors and the City Manager. They all agreed that the Plan is acceptable to go to City Council on November 16. Staff will be recommending adoption of the resolution. If the resolution is adopted by Council, Lucinda Smith wanted to have the following six items pointed out: 1. The importance of reducing greenhouse gas emissions will be acknowledged. 2. The Plan will be accepted as a blueprint for implementation without committing budget resources to any specific actions. 3. The City Manager will have flexibility to select specific action from the Plan to be advanced in budget recommendations and staff work plans. 4. The City Manager will be required to convene a municipal energy management team to sustain a focus on effective greenhouse gas reducing activities, and to coordinate reduction of greenhouse gases from municipal operations. 5. The City Manager will be required to prepare a biennial report to Council in advance of the City's budget preparation, evaluating past greenhouse gas reducing activities and making recommendations for future actions. Natural Resources A v sory Board • November 3, 1999 Page 3 6. The City Manager will be directed to consider greenhouse gas reducing activities in his budget recommendations. Council would decide whether to commit funds to implement specific measures in the context of the budget. Three other boards, Electric, Transportation and AQAB, have reviewed the materials and recommend that Council adopt stronger language in the resolution that results in implementation of the Plan over a 10-year period, and identifies the desired greenhouse gas reduction target. The Boards feel that the idea of adoption of the reduction target makes a stronger statement for City staff, the community and other local governments to make commitments to reduce greenhouse gases. Phil Friedman said the Citizen Committee began about one -and -one-half years ago with a large group of folks who were engaged in the process. The folks who stayed on did a good job of guiding the plan. Given the political realities, the plan is not as aggressive as what the committee would like it to be. The plan wasn't well received at the first work session, and the newspaper didn't help matters either. They went back to the drawing board and came out with as good of a plan as possible. The primary concern was that they didn't shoot for a per - capita reduction, but rather an overall reduction over a course of time. The 30% reduction by 2010 is a good number. The committee went through a voting process to prioritize various issues. There was a lot of discussion resulting in good consensus among the group. The committee was unaware of the rankings by staff and for the most part they were pretty close. There were a couple of surprises, the committee didn't give education as high a rating as did staff. Another surprise were efforts to reduce city government total energy use. Lucinda Smith had a conversation with Dr. Roger Pielke, who is a CSU atmospheric science professor and the new State climatologist. He felt the measure proposed in the draft were all reasonable and beneficial, and could support every one of them. Friedman said it is his opinion, and the opinion of many, that the resolution is inadequate in terms of providing implementation of the plan to accomplish the 30% reduction. It needs to be recommended to Council that they modify and accept the more stringent version. If Council does not act on the more stringent resolution, Friedman said he could not support the plan. Susie Gordon added the AQAB wanted a copy of their memo passed around to the NRAB. Attached to the memo is the resolution they have worked on to provide the stronger language. Discussion • Ohlson: The Electric, Transportation and Air Quality Advisory Boards have all supported the 30% reduction. Suggest repeating what the CSU professor said, it's a valuable perspective. • Ohlson: Question how the staff team could have a "centralized recycling drop off site" as first on the Pending Measures list, and "push for tighter national fuel Natural Resources Advisoi y Board November 3, 1999 Page 4 efficiency standards" as fifth. The staff team was a cross section of all the City departments. • Ohlson: Agree with the folks who want to get the resolution strengthened. At first wasn't going to support it because the language isn't strong enough. There are many people whom I trust that have worked on this, so I will support it. Are Phil, Eric and Tim all in agreement on the changes that need to made to the optional resolution? • Friedman: This is the first time I've seen the language in writing. All of the pieces are there. • Miller: Agree the resolution needs to be more firm as far as giving direction to staff. • Rastall: Have concerns, it seems you never get what you ask for. If the resolution is watered down to appease the majority of Council, will they try to knock it down even further. • Ohlson: They are doing it to appease the minority of Council, that's the bizarre twist. There are four people who support these concepts, but the three most vocal people are in the minority. The thing that's going on is to try to minimize any controversy to get something that everyone can support. That is not necessarily the best public policy. Shoemaker explained there is strong concurrence with the plan from the various Boards, and that's heartening. The resolution as is presented in the packet will have minor tweaking done. But, in terms of a staff recommendation, it is as it was presented today. There will be additional conversation with senior management. This project has a lot of complexities in terms of getting consent from every City Service Area. Staff has presented the plan to the Boards and Commissions three times. Staff met with John Fischbach and discussed the specific issue of having a target in the resolution. He is the senior staff member for the overall report and he recommended it be put in the "Whereas" section of the resolution, so that it stays in front of the people, but not in the "Now Therefore" section. The reason was he believes that version will pass, and the other version will not pass. We have clearly communicated to Greg Byrne and John Fischbach what the Board recommendations are. The staff recommendation will be much like the resolution as you see it now. The alternative language resolution will be in the packet as a recommendation from Boards. Shoemaker said he was very pleased with his meeting with John Fischbach. Fischbach was very supportive. He directed the first biennial report be done within six months. He very much supported the inter -departmental energy management team. From a Natural Resources Department director position Shoemaker said he would like to see stronger language, but in terms of practical differences in implementation, there probably won't be much. The resolution does require staff to keep it in front of the City Manager and Council. • Fischer: The Board is not advisory to staff, so I appreciate the direction Tom has been given. Is what I'm hearing from around the table to advise Council that they want the language strengthened? Natural Resources Afvisory Board • November 3, 1999 Page 5 Murphy: The Electric, Transportation and Air Quality Advisory Boards have all requested the stronger language. The folks on the Citizens Committee did not see the stronger language as a committee. Friedman: Suspect the majority of the folks on the Citizens Committee would support the stronger resolution. Bill Miller made the following motion: Moves the NRAB send a letter to City Council to recommend the 09110199 draft of the Cities for Climate Protection Plan, and we also endorse the memorandum of November 2nd from the AQAB as it pertains to their proposal for a resolution. The NRAB supports the recommendations of the AQAB, the Transportation board, and the Electric Board and we also support the Air Quality Board's version of a resolution for adoption by council. The motion passed unanimously. Randy Fischer will draft the memo. NRAB Annual Report Susie Gordon stated the NRAB Annual Report is required by the City Clerk's. Office. It goes to City Council, along with a packet of all the other board's reports for the past year, and work plans for the upcoming year. Discussion: • Fischer asked how important this is to Council. • Murphy said the annual report is probably more interesting to the Board, to see the things they've accomplished during the year. He also said the work plan is more critical because it gives them an opportunity to identify critical issues from the Board's perspective, that they want to be involved in. • Shoemaker: In the last ten years he 's not had any feedback on the reports the NRAB submitted to Council. • Craig: The annual report will be extremely important this year because Council is looking at the boards and trying to decide how important they are. It's imperative to show how much you have done, the advice you've provided and how active you have been. There are new Council members looking at things differently. • Miller: The format of the report may be detail -shy as to the actions listed in the report. Maybe they should indicate when the Board generated memos with respect to each of the topics • Murphy: Not sure how much of this gets read, would hate to see staff put hours of effort into it. It needn't be a ten page report. • Miller: I'm not suggesting any more than one page, just add some descriptors. • Ohlson: Have a different take on this, I like the format. Would like to focus on the items that were brought to the Board by staff, and put emphasis on the Boards' responses to issues that were brought to them. • Gordon: Happy to incorporate everyone's edits to the report if they would mark their hard copy and give them to her. Natural Resources Advisory Board November 3, 1999 Page 6 • Ohlson: Would like to give examples of some of the types of edits he would like to see. • Fischer: Would also like to hear from the rest of the Board. Will be willing to put the annual report together himself. • Ohlson: Don't highlight that they had eleven regular and eight special meetings, and don't bold that the Board sent eighteen memoranda. Don't have qualifiers in front of any of the bullets and be consistent — capitalize all the words. Would probably suggest not to include FIDOS. The Board didn't spend ten minutes on it. Rather than focus on one group, list dogs -off -leash issues. Leave off Street Department, didn't spend much time on that. Eliminate all of the "reviews". Regarding minor league baseball in Fort Collins, what was really discussed was the stadium and Lee Martinez Park. Shoemaker said it might be useful to emphasize responses to Council's Policy Agenda. Most of the issues listed are related to the Policy Agenda. Shoemaker also said there are two different sets of NA regulations, one that governs human activities in Natural Areas, and the other that is a component of the Land Use Code that deals with natural habitat and features. Both should be included, since they are both significant. • Rastall: Recommend moving the paragraph section to the end of the document. Keep the first line and move the paragraph to the end. • Sears: Suggest adding Boxelder Sanitation District, they've spend a lot of time on that. Gordon said there was a lot of work that got processed at the committee level that didn't necessarily need to be brought to the whole board • Murphy: Add a bullet on Natural Area Purchases. • Fischer: Will take the hard copies and make the revisions. The draft will be reviewed at the November 17a' meeting. NRAB 2000 Work Plan Fischer asked if this format is what's been used in the past. Phil Murphy stated it has changed numerous times. The format can change as needed. The board discussed what should and should not be included in the work plan, as well as the format that should be used. The consensus was to leave out the "status" column for the Council version, but to have it in a tabular format for the board where they can periodically update what the actual status is. Randy Fischer will work on the 2000 Work Plan and will have a draft version available for discussion and review at the November 17 meeting. Kelly Ohlson asked if the New Issues and Concerns Roundtable and the Natural Areas Work Plan will be on the next agenda. Ohlson also requested a chart of NRD staff, including their main responsibilities and where their salaries come from. Natural Resources Advisory Board • November 3, 1999 Page 7 Boxelder Easement Update Sears said there was an update provided in the packet. The Agenda Item prepared for Council was completed today and is, basically, an embellishment of the update in the packet. The Water Board took their own initiative to pass a motion echoing staff's recommendations. Boxelder will make their pitch at the November 16 Council meeting. They will be asking for improvements that will not be recommended by staff. Randy Fischer and Sally Craig went to the Larimer County Flood Control Review Board meeting. That board approved most of what Boxelder is planning to do, but it is unknown if that will carry any weight with City Council. Sears said part of the reluctance of the City is because of the idea to have a study of the reach of the river from the ELC to I-25 that takes into consideration the natural area plans and restoration plans the City would like to see accomplished. Nate Donovan made the following motion: Move that the NRAB agree with the recommendation of City staff with respect to the measures proposed by the Boxelder Sanitation District. The motion passed unanimously. Loveland/Fort Collins Water District Easement City staff and the NRAB have reviewed the plans and have no objections to the easements. Cooper Slough Update Tom Shoemaker said Randy Fischer thought it would be a good idea to update the board on this because Tim Johnson, Transportation Board member, had some concerns. This is a unique resource that is fed by underground springs. It is a warm water slough surrounded by agriculture land. In the winter the water remains open and is attractive to waterfowl, which results in a very high wildlife value. The Division of Wildlife consistently expresses interest in it. The issue that came up at the Transportation Board meeting is the truck route. There were comments about the relocation of Vine Drive. Will be looking at alternatives in the next six months. There are lots of issues to consider. A development proposal backing up to the slough is in Larimer County jurisdiction. It is in our Growth Management area, but not in the City of Fort Collins. The proposal is for a commercial/industrial type of development. So far the City has opposed it, because it is counter to the Structure Plan, there are inadequate natural area buffers in the proposal. The property was subdivided so it wouldn't have to be annexed into the City. That was Natural Resources Adviswy Board November 3, 1999 Page 8 legal, but not up -front. The adjacent landowner is being contacted to see if the City can acquire the land. The NRAB will schedule a field trip at the next meeting. Review Council's Six Month Planning Calendar 12-07-99 Pay as you Throw Ordinance 12-14-99 Study Session — Floodplain Regulations 02-15-00 Floodplain Regulations Review Future Agenda Items 11-17-99 Review the Board's workplan New Issues and Concerns Pay As You Throw Review Action Log Remove: Gateway Park Add: Field Trip to Cooper Slough The tour for the recycling plant won't be scheduled any time soon. Announcements • Bill Miller: The agenda for the Larimer County EAB and the NRAB joint meeting has been set. Committee Reports Trails Committee: The committee met on November 3. Craig Foreman talked about six different trail projects. Most of them are not problematic. • Arapaho Bend — Comfortable with placement, minimal natural resource impact • Spring Creek Trail — Not much natural area invovlement — there might be some • properties worth looking at • CSURF — Too early to tell where the trail will be, there is not a good plan as of yet, trying to maintain a large buffer along Spring Creek • Union Pacific Trail — will run along the tracks, not much impact till get to Fossil Creek area, 10" concrete multi -modal trail • Fossil Creek — comes in by Red -tail Grove, looking at six different alignments • Poudre River Trail — section where it was washed out this spring, good discussion on possibility of moving the trail south and farther away from the river Solid Waste Committee: The committee met on Novmeber 1. Pay -As -You -Throw will be coming to the board on November 17. The committee didn't have substantial changes. The crux is to encourage trash haulers to keep better records of what they picked up and have that information available to the City so the program can be reviewed to ensure compliance. Adiournment: The meeting was adjourned at 9:55 p.m.