HomeMy WebLinkAboutNatural Resources Advisory Board - Minutes - 12/06/1995MINUTES.
CITY OF FORT COLLINS
NATURAL RESOURCES ADVISORY BOARD
REGULAR MEETING
281 CONFERENCE ROOM - 281 N. COLLEGE AVE.
DECEMBER 6,1995
For Reference: Phil Murphy, NRAB Chair - 491-6303
Gina Janett, Council Liaison - 493-4677
Tom Shoemaker, Staff Liaison - 221-6263
Board Members Present
Craig McGee, Phil Friedman, Katy Mason, Phil Murphy, Ed Secor, Lisa Steffes, Kelly Ohlson and
Jan Behunek
Board Members Absent
Bill Miller (excused)
Staff Present
Natural Resources Department: Tom Shoemaker, Sally Maggart, Rob Wilkinson and Susie Gordon,
Water Utility Department: Mike Smith, and Engineering Department: Marc Engemoen
Guests
John Bartholow
The meeting was called to order at 7:02 p.m.
Review and Approval of Minutes
With the following changes, the minutes of the November 1, 1995 meeting were approved as written:
Phil Friedman noted that the last sentence under Announcements on Page 2 should read
constitutional "ability" rather than "responsibility". He added that paragraph 6 on Page 7 should read
"did not qualify in terms of a natural area" rather than "useless in terms of a natural area"
Ed Secor noted that Page 1, Review and Approval of Minutes, should read "cost" instead of "lost"
sharing. He added that during the Registry Ridge discussion on Page 8, the discussion where he and
Katy Mason had raised the question about the overall desirability of the project and the phasing
criteria was omitted from the minutes. Secor said that they had expressed reservations about the
appropriateness of the entire project and the use of a natural area to get points.
Kelly Ohlson said that Page 3, third paragraph, should read "the Larabee's building". Ohlson also
noted that on Page 6, a recommendation by Councilmember Janett was accepted as a friendly
amendment to a motion. He said that only board members can amend motions.
Natural Resources Advisory Board Meeting
December 6, 1995
Page 2 n ,
Agenda Review
No changes were made to the agenda. Katy Mason noted that the Cost of Services Project
Discussion Paper dated October 11, 1995, that was included in the packet, was incomplete. Sally
Maggart made new copies for the board members.
Announcements
Shoemaker explained the submittal of the Go Colorado Legacy Grant for the Cache la Poudre Big
Thompson Rivers Heritage Program. He said that the concept paper was sponsored by Latimer and
Weld Counties and the cities and towns along the rivers. Shoemaker added that Fort Collins' pieces
included Water Treatment Plant 1 road construction, natural areas along the river and trail
extensions. He noted that CSU also submitted a concept paper for the Environmental Learning
Center.
Friedman announced that he attended the Colorado State University Master Plan Presentation. He
said that it is an incredible master plan proposal that is being approached from an urban design
concept that fits well with the direction the City is taking.
Rockwell Ranch Land Exchange, Mike Smith
Mike Smith, Director of the City's Water Utilities, presented a map showing the land that the cities
of Fort Collins and Greeley acquired in the 1920's for water right purposes and have been leasing
to ranchers since then for grazing. He explained that the proposed land exchange is between the U.S.
Forest Service and the cities of Fort Collins, Greeley and Water Supply and Storage Company
(WSSC). Smith said that the original administrative plan involved a three to four year timeframe
for thee property exchange, but Representative Wayne Allard has offered a quicker legislative
solution.
Smith referred to the proposed bill and noted the modifications. He said that the draft legislation was
originally agreeable to the Forest Service; since that time there has been a falling out between Allard
and the Forest Service and Allard's office is not interested in pursuing negotiations with the Forest
Service.
Smith reviewed the provisions of the draft legislation. He said the exchange involves 920 acres and
would give the cities ownership of the land under the reservoirs. Smith noted that Joe Wright
Reservoir is the one that involves Fort Collins.
Smith said that the land exchange will eliminate a possible title conflict between Greeley and the
Forest Service regarding the 10-acre Timberline Lake Property.
Natural Resources Advisory Board Meeting
December 6, 1995
Page 3
Smith explained the Joint Operations Plan (JOP) whereby Greeley, Fort Collins and the WSSC work.
together to leave 10 cfs in the river from late November through April. He said that the Forest
Service will grant perpetual access easements to the cities with the requirement that the cities make
the facilities accessible to the public.
Smith said the Endangered Species Act (ESA) recovery program will continue but the completion
date of January 1997 was added by Allard's office. He noted that the Water Board voted to strike
the date from the legislation.
Smith noted that the only water rights included in the land exchange involve the South Fork water
rights being dedicated to the CWCB for the instream flow program. He said that the Forest Service
has the right to purchase the reservoir sites if they are abandoned by the cities.
Smith noted that the WSSC and the January 1997 date were added to the legislation. Kelly Ohlson
asked why the Forest Service would take exception to the inclusion of the WSSC. He asked if the
Forest Service might have a problem with the Trout Unlimited lawsuit filing on Long Draw
Reservoir that would make removing the date more environmentally friendly. Smith said that Fort
Collins and Greeley might ask the WSSC to drop out if the Long Draw Reservoir is a problem.
Jan Behunek asked if there were any recent competing proposals for the Rockwell Ranch lands.
Smith answered that there have been no offers or any other use proposed.
Ed Secor asked if there had been any talk about what piece would be kept in city ownership. Smith
explained that a piece of Section 30 would probably be kept by the City of Greeley because their
Employee Association has a cabin located there. He added that if that happened, Greeley would
have to pay Fort Collins for half of it. Smith noted that the areas marked in red on the board's packet
map are what would be exchanged.
Behunek asked what the rationale was for the stretch along the Poudre that is located in the
wilderness section. He said that part of it looks like it might be useful. Smith explained that the
Kelly Flats Campground sits on top of the land that is not in the wilderness.
Phil Friedman noted that he talked with Mike Bennett in Allard's Fort Collins office about the
wording on Page 4, line 10 through 17, and Page 9, line 7 through 21, of the proposed bill to get
clarification on what new dam or what piece of the Poudre was referenced and why was it in the bill.
Smith explained that the bill is referring to the Seaman Reservoir located north of the Water
Treatment Plant 1. Friedman said that he would like to see Fort Collins request that the language
on Pages 4 and 9 be clarified so there is no room for misinterpretation. Smith agreed.
Natural Resources Advisory Board Meeting
December 6, 1995
Page 4
Smith said that he is seeking a recommendation from the board. Phil Friedman moved to.
recommend to Council that the land exchange be approved, with the stipulation that the language
included in Allard's Bill, `through January 1997" not be included or approved by Council and
the language stipulation mentioned with respect to Pages 4 and 9 be clearly defined Ed Secor
seconded the motion.
Friedman noted that Allard's office said that the bill does not have a number or name because it
cannot be presented to Congress until it has been approved by all entities. He added that he would
need to see a redraft of the bill and it would have to be approved by the affected parties. Smith said
that the recommended changes will be sent to Allard's office and the bill will have to be redrafted
before being presented to Council. He said that it was not planned originally to bring the revised bill
back to the boards.
McGee said that it appeared that a motion was needed to take the comments to Allard's office and
get a redraft of the bill. Ohlson said that if the changes are not made in the bill, the Board might not
recommend approval. Smith suggested putting that in the motion. Friedman said that was the intent
of the motion and he was open to an amendment. McGee recommended amending the motion to
say that Council approve of the measure if, and only if, the changes are made to the bill.
Friedman accepted that as a friendly amendment.
Steffes said that she is confused about the procedure. She asked if the bill can be submitted if some
of the entities do not approve of it. Smith said that the bill will not be submitted if Fort Collins does
not approve it. Mason asked if it will be submitted without Forest Service approval. Smith
answered that a copy was sent to the Forest Service for review, but Allard's office does not need
Forest.Service approval for the submittal.
Phil Murphy said that he is uncomfortable that the Board is going to recommend the bill to Council
and get in the middle of a political situation between Allard and the Forest Service. Smith said that
staff has concerns also because this is not the way that the City does business. He reiterated that
legislation is not needed to get the land exchange done; it can be done administratively.
Mason said that she is hesitant to vote for it until she sees the new language; she said she does not
trust Allard and is concerned about the language. Friedman questioned why Allard got involved.
Smith said that it could be done quicker legislatively and it was Allard's perception that Congress
is oriented favorably toward him and he can get it through.
Ohlson said he wanted the record to reflect that Councilmembers do read the board minutes. He
gave the following reasons why he was voting against the land exchange: 1.) It is a potential
political situation between the Forest Service and Allard, plus the fact that it can be done
Natural Resources Advisory Board Meeting
December 6, 1995
Page 5
administratively; 2. ) The Forest Service does not want to participate and his allegiance is with them;.
3.) Potential ambiguity about the dam issue and more time is needed to clear that up; and 4.) He
is unlikely to vote for a Wayne Allard sponsored bill.
Secor said that if the legislation were dropped and it goes forward administratively, questions still
exist about the Seaman Reservoir and the timeline on the ESA issue. He asked how that would be
addressed. Smith said that Fort Collins and the Forest Service would work with Greeley to split the
property and negotiate their own deal.
John Bartholow, a guest at the meeting and a member of the City of Fort Collins' Water Board, said
that the Water Board is encouraging establishing regional relationships with other water suppliers.
Bartholow noted that the Forest Service had been in favor of the proposal before the changes were
made and they should be asked to see if they are still agreeable.
McGee asked if, aside from the politics, the land exchange is reasonable from a staff perspective.
Smith said yes, that either administratively or legislatively, the end result is the same for Fort
Collins. Ohlson said that he recommends doing it administratively if the Forest Service does not
take exception.
Phil Murphy restated the amendment to the motion to recommend to Council that the land
exchange be approved if, and only if, the noted changes are made in the bill. Murphy called for
a vote. The motion did not pass, with a vote of I-7 against the motion Murphy said that he will
write a letter to Council expressing the Board's concern.
Secor asked if this could be brought back to the Board after the issues are addressed. Smith said that
it should come back if the issue is to change. Secor said that the two issues are to make the
requested changes in the wording and to make sure that the Forest Service is on board. Mason said
that she would support the land exchange if the conditions are met. She added that cooperation with
the Forest Service is needed.
Ohlson said he wanted the minutes to reflect that the vote does not indicate displeasure with the
excellent work of Mike Smith. The Board thanked Smith for his presentation.
Timberline Road Project Update, Marc Engemoen
Marc Engemoen, Engineering Manager, said he would like to update the Board on the public
participation project and how the Board could interact with the process. He said that a team of
consultants, led by DMJ in Denver, has been hired to find out the needs of the community.
Engemoen said there will be an informational open house at the Lincoln Center on January 31 from
5:00-7:00 p.m., followed by a more formal question and answer meeting.
Natural Resources Advisory Board Meeting
December 6, 1995
Page 6
Engemoen said that the next stage will involve debate forums and the third stage will be on decision
making and conflict resolution. He noted that there will be opportunity for Board involvement, as
citizens, to participate in the public meetings, debates and work groups. Engemoen said that he will
make two other presentations to the board; one just before or after the open house and another
seeking recommendation to Council.
Mason asked about the timing on the debate and conflict resolution. Engemoen said that the month
of February would be the debate period and March would be devoted to task teams generating
recommendations to take back to Council.
Ohlson asked if the plans will reflect a four or six lane road. Engemoen answered that it could be
a six lane road; he referred to the Information Sheet 4. He said the information is being analyzed.
Friedman noted that the map is not congruent with the language in the Information Sheets.
Ohlson referred to Information Sheet 5 and asked where the best place is to build. Engemoen
answered that it would be straight north; the original project was from Prospect to Summit View,
but the amount of money in Choices 95 was $3,100,000 and would have been enough to build only
to Mulberry. Engemoen explained that it either was not described right originally or the amount
should have been higher, but the revenue projections show enough money to build to Summit View
if that is what the community wants. McGee said that it looked as if it would be more expensive to
go north. Engemoen said that the consultant will do a cost estimate.
Behunek noted that it looked like a short debate and conflict resolution process and they are the two
most critical parts. He did not see how it allows enough time for the public to digest the information
from the consultants. Engemoen said it could take more time.
It was decided to have Engemoen return to the February board meeting to provide more information
from the open house comments and consultant's analysis.
Potential Natural Area Purchase: Red -Tailed Grove Site, Tom Shoemaker & Rob Wilkinson
Shoemaker said that this is a 39.62 acre site on South College Avenue. He noted that it was once
proposed as a Pace Warehouse and a Spradley Barr dealership; on the north side is Cameron Office
Park and the area to the south is undeveloped. Shoemaker said that staff is looking for the board's
perspective and recommendation on the four alternative approaches to the acquisition. He said the
cost is comparatively expensive, $800,000 for less than 40 acres, but is not bad for South College
Ave. Shoemaker said the fifth option is to let the site go back. He added that there are funds
available for the purchase.
Natural Resources Advisory Board Meeting
December 6, 1995
Page 7
Mason asked if this was part of the natural areas inventory. Shoemaker said yes, that the site was
ranked high priority. Ohlson asked if there was one alternative that surfaces as a professional
recommendations. Rob Wilkinson, Senior Environmental Planner, said that in terms of visual
characteristics and enhancement, it would be best to keep all site options open. He added that if
something like Cameron Park with a commercial, residential and office mix might be reasonably
absorbed by the site, then a more in-depth study would be needed on the options. Ohlson asked if
the City could purchase it all, control the development and in accordance with the natural areas sales
tax money, sell it off.
Friedman said that sites C and D look the best for development. He added that he would like to see
the City either sell to a developer and impose criteria or become the developer and do what is right.
Shoemaker said that it can work either way; it is uncharted water politically. He added that if the
Board recommends buying it all, he would like a recommendation on whether to consider a limited
development option to recapture the value. Mason asked if the City could explore future limited
development when the natural areas tax ends. Secor said that it might upset people if the land is used
as an open area and then developed. Murphy said that this may be a new and innovative way to do
business and he would like to recommend looking at it further.
Shoemaker noted that the individual components are nice but the way it comes together is
outstanding. He said that the views are wonderful along this part of the corridor. Shoemaker added
that since the Help Preserve Open Space Initiative passed, the recommendation is to move ahead and
purchase the site and authorize staff to evaluate limited development and the marketing potential.
Mason said that one benefit is that it could be a model to developers. Shoemaker said that Rob
Wilkinson and Karen Manci are recommending buying it all and keeping it all from a resource
protection aspect. Steffes said she would like to see the entire area protected.
John Bartholow noted that the native grassland areas are high fossil areas and probably should not
be disturbed. He said that site E is the highest wildlife use and development in sites C and D would
alter the character of the land.
Friedman said that there is heavy development surrounding the area and there might not be long-term
positive affects as an open space. He added that he would like to focus more on adding land to the
Cathy Fromme Prairie. Shoemaker said this would be an opportunity to make a natural connection
in an urban area.
Katy Mason moved to purchase the entire parcel with the option of looking no further than
Alternative 1 and after the purchase of Alternative 1, review the options. Lisa Steffes seconded
the motion. The motion passed by a vote of 7-1.
Natural Resources Advisory Board Meeting
December 6, 1995
Page 8
Solid Waste Update, Susie Gordon
Susie Gordon, Environmental Planner in the Natural Resources Department, said that there are a
series of things happening simultaneously. She noted that she discussed the composting facility at
last month's board meeting and will be back in six to eight weeks with a proposal. Gordon added
that there have been two important ordinances passed in an effort to increase recycling: one is the
"bundling ordinance", that took effect October 1, that requires trash haulers to include the recycling
costs in the trash hauling charge; the other is the "pay -as -you -throw ordinance" that requires
payment on all garbage generated.
Gordon noted that the trash haulers have requested an amendment to the pay -as -you -throw ordinance
that would give them the ability to charge a fixed fee; they have asked for this charge so if a
customer forgot to put out trash, was on vacation or changed haulers without notice, there would be
no financial hardship to the hauler. She added that this seemed to be a valid request and after a
meeting of staff, community members and the haulers, it was decided that it would be appropriate.
Gordon said that a formula was set to prevent anyone from bypassing the spirit of the ordinance by
charging too little for the volume part of the rate. She explained that the formula is that the container
rate of $1 or $2 bag/can has to be .13596 of the flat rate. She added that the haulers can decide what
to charge for the flat rate based on whatever the cost is to go down street. Gordon said that the flat
fee has to be smaller than or equal to 6.45 percent of the container rate.
Kelly Ohlson asked if the 60 percent rate is reasonable. Gordon said it is reasonable and will work.
She added that it could go down to 40 or 50 percent, but the high base rate will be costly for big trash
generators. Tom Shoemaker noted that Loveland's rate is at 52 percent. Katy Mason said that the
base rate makes sense. Ohlson said he is not comfortable with the 60 percent. Shoemaker said that
the City cannot legally tell the haulers what to charge. He presented the following formulas:
1. Aggregate cost = base rate + 4.33 volume rate for one can or bag.
2. Base rate must be less than or equal to 60 percent of the aggregate cost.
Mason asked how the ordinance would be enforced. Shoemaker said that the violators would be
taken to court. Gordon noted that the haulers must submit an annual report on the base rate charge.
Ed Secor asked if the formula is the base rate plus 4 times the container rate. Shoemaker answered
yes and added that there has to be a system that makes sure if more than one bag a week is put out,
there will be a charge. Mason asked about the definition of the size of a bag. Gordon said that the
haulers agreed at the meeting to use a 35-gallon standard.
Natural Resources Advisory Board Meeting
December 6, 1995
Page 9
Ohlson expressed concern about the time factor. Gordon said that the trash haulers bill in advance
and most have billed for January.
Gordon pointed out that when the ordinance was first developed, it was intended that the composting
facility would be operating by January 1. She said that since this has not yet happened, consumers
will have to pay as much for one bag of grass clippings as they do for garbage. Gordon added that
there is another three months before the grass season and staff is working on an interim solution for
composting. Shoemaker noted that there are other grass recycling options available with mulching
mowers and composting at home.
Ohlson asked about the billing cycle. Gordon said it is quarterly; each month a segment of
customers are billed quarterly.
Ohlson asked if there is a way to delay the ordinance in order to allow time to inform the customers
about the changes. Craig McGee said that he is supportive of delaying the ordinance until March
1 to allow for communication in January and February. Gordon noted that it is incumbent on the
haulers to let the customers know; they have been aware of the ordinance for months.
Ohlson said that since the ordinance is already passed, the communication to the public needs to be
carefully done so it does not appear to be coming up for consideration. Gordon noted that the
haulers were sent a letter in mid -October and did not respond for four weeks. Shoemaker added that
notices were sent in May to the haulers.
Phil Murphy asked for more information on the percentages. Ohlson suggested using the 60 percent
figure to start since the haulers agreed on that and adapt it later if necessary. McGee asked if there
was any language in the ordinance to cover that. Gordon answered that Shoemaker had suggested
going to Council with an amendment saying that this is what we are going to try but may come back
with a change.
Phil Friedman moved that Board recommend to Council acceptance of the 60 percent cap to the
flat monthly fee with the stipulation that its efficacy will be reviewed at some undetermined point
and if review is needed, it will be brought to Council. Craig McGee seconded the motion.
Mason asked if wording is needed on how often for review. Ohlson said he would like to build in
the review. Jan Behunek suggested checking it within the first year. Murphy said there should be
a more specific time frame. Ohlson said that he would like the review of the 60 percent figure at
the end of the year, and not to exceed one year from the start of the ordinance. Friedman
accepted that as a friendly amendment to the motion. The motion passed unanimously (8-0).
Natural Resources Advisory Board Meeting
December 6, 1995
Page 10
The board members thanked Gordon for her presentation. —
1996 Work Plan, Phil Murphy
Because of the lengthy meeting, this was deferred to the January meeting. Shoemaker explained
that because of so many pressing agenda items, the board has not had time to incorporate comments
and suggestions on the 1996 Work Plan. He said that this will be the main thrust at the January
meeting. Shoemaker added that he will let Council know the reason for the delay.
Arapahoe Bend Signs, Tom Shoemaker
Because of the lengthy meeting, this was deferred to the January meeting.
Growth Management Committee Report
Mason noted again that the board members had received a partial copy of the Cost of Services
Project Discussion Paper dated October 11, 1995 in their packet. She said that the Growth
Management Committee met with Alan Krcmarik, the City's Finance Director, and discussed the
paper. Mason added that a public meeting had been held last week on the cost of services to get
input from the public. She said that although no action has to be taken tonight, the Board will be
making a recommendation to Council.
Ohlson said it appears that the costs for services are not being recovered through growth and noted
the logic appears to be that the next 20,000 people will pay for 1/6 of the new costs through
development fees. Shoemaker said that the intent is to try to insure that there is not an enlarging gap.
Mason said that this will be back on the agenda after Growth Management has looked at it and the
Board has had the opportunity to read all the pages of the Cost of Services Project Discussion Paper.
She said she will check with the Growth Management Committee to see how they are progressing.
Shoemaker said that the January agenda will be full and there is a plan for a second meeting. He
noted that in addition to the regular meeting on January 3, there will be a study session on January
17.
Other Business
None.
Adjournment
The meeting adjourned at 11:00 p.m