Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutNatural Resources Advisory Board - Minutes - 07/11/1990MINUTES CITY OF FORT COLLINS NATURAL RESOURCES ADVISORY BOARD REGULAR MEETING CITY HALL WEST - CIC ROOM JULY 11, 1990 - 7:00 PM Board Members Present Charles Davis Dave Dubois Christine Ferguson Board Members Absent Joyce Berry Deni LaRue Staff Members Present Tom Shoemaker Brian Woodruff Tim Johnson Will Smith Harold Swope Ward Luthi Bill Miller Shirley Bruns Susie Gordon Minutes Minutes were unanimously approved as submitted. Introduction Christine Ferguson was introduced as a new member of the Natural Resources Advisory Board. Staff Reports Wastewater Treatment Plant Expansion Plan. Mike Smith, Director of the Water and Wastewater Department reviewed future plans for wastewater treatment for the City. He showed a video entitled, "The Future of Water Quality Treatment". The plan described in the video is the result of an extensive study of alternatives which was conducted by Montgomery Engineers and a committee of Water Board members, City staff, and Council. The executive summary of the report is available to Board members on request. The plan outlines the following course of action: 1. Expansion and modification of Wastewater Treatment Plant 1 (WWTP 1) in two phases to ensure a long-term treatment capacity of 6.0 mgd. Phase 1 costs would be $3.6 million and Phase 2 would be $2.6 million. 2. Expansion and modification of WWTP 2 in two phases to ensure a long-term treatment capacity of 21.2 mgd for domestic wastes plus 1.8 mgd for Anheuser-Busch. Phase 1 costs would be $18.8 million and Phase 2 would be $4.0 million. 3. Construction of a new WWTP 3 downstream of WWTP 2 for an estimated cost of $42.6 million. The new plant would be a regional plant that could serve the Boxelder Water District, Loveland, and Windsor. The water utility is working with other regional entities to coordinate planning efforts. Costs for the improvements will be allocated to current customers with an increase of 9.5%, plus 6% per year. Current customer fees will increase from $11.77 to $16.05 in 1995. New customers will be charged about the same as now. Commercial customer rates will vary, but will be significantly higher than they are now. If approved, the Phase I improvements would begin construction in 1992 with targeted completion dates of January 1994. Phase 2 improvements would be implemented as needed in the future. The recommended plan will be considered by City Council on August 7. Smith asked that the Natural Resources Board members make comments and recommendations on the wastewater expansion report. In response to a question whether a new plant will improve water quality, Smith stated that there will be improvement with complete nitrification and higher quality effluent. A question was raised regarding the population projections used for the planning study and how a reduced growth rate would affect project costs. Smith stated that the planning study assumed a growth rate of 2 percent. If there is only a 1% growth rate instead of 2%, it will take 5 to 8 years longer for the project to pay for itself. Of the $18.8 million costs for Phase I, $6.5 will be allocated to existing customers and $13.3 will be allocated to new customers. The reason costs will go up is due to additional new standards, upgrading, and restoring capabilities. If there was no growth, costs would still increase due to the standards being raised. Will Smith asked how the plan would affect instream flows. Smith responded that increased water demand from growth will not reduce in -stream flow, but will shift future return flow from Plant #2 to Plant #3. Smith noted that water conservation programs, including the new state requirements for water metering, were included in planning efforts. Conservation efforts change the organic capacity concentration, but not the amount of water capacity. Fort Collins has a high organic load which is considered in all water planning. Ferguson asked if the $2.6 million contribution from Anheuser- Busch fulfills their committment to the city? Smith commented that the money will only cover costs of resolving existing pH problems at the facility. AB's committment to the City might need renegotiation if their capacity increased. They are currently applying wastewater to land in Weld County and the City is confident that system will take up the extra wastewater. The flooding that occurred two years ago was an internal problem which led to too much effluent. Mail Creek, Harmony Corridor, Natural Areas Plan Updates: Shoemaker summarized updates on these projects in a memo to the Board. He also distributed a memo regarding the Fairway Estates Homeowners Association. The memo is a draft memorandum of understanding outlining the issues, the City's responsibilities, and time frames for completion. Items outlined include the trash racks, erosion control, water quality study, and mitigation funding. Swope questioned the time frames, noting that the Homeowner's Association has been frustrated by a lack of action in the past. Shoemaker said that he attended part of the Planning and Zoning Board worksession that afternoon on the Harmony Corridor Plan. The Planning Board intends to hold another open house and public forum on the Plan, but.no date has been set. Johnson noted that the Planning Department has prepared a list of the major issues raised on the Harmony Corridor Plan and suggested that these be included in the next NRAB mailing. He noted that the document demonstrates that the Board has had an impact on the Plan. Smith asked if the delays with the Harmony Corridor Plan would mean delays in the Prospect Corridor Plan. Shoemaker stated that the Harmony Corridor Plan was still on the Council Policy Agenda, but he would have to check on the current schedule. The work plan for the Natural Areas Plan will also be included in the next NRAB mailing. Old Business Recycling: Shoemaker summarized the current status of the curbside recycling program. Staff has distributed a draft plan and is seeking comment on it. Staff will be meeting one-on-one with trash haulers, the Chamber of Commerce, and other groups to gather the final round of public comments on the draft report. At present, the program is scheduled for Council consideration on August 7. Shoemaker stressed that the schedule for the recycling program is still somewhat uncertain because the County has not made a decision on the Material Recovery Facility (MRF). The County has received nine proposals on the MRF. A review committee, which includes Shoemaker, will meet to formally review the proposals on July 16. If the MRF is infeasible, the recycling plan would go to Council as scheduled on August 7. If the MRF is feasible, then Council and the NRAB may want a work session on it, which could mean a delay in the Council hearing. However, Council does not want staff to slow down on recycling. Shoemaker noted that the County is also considering the need for an Intermediate Processing Center (IPC) at the landfill, as an alternative to the MRF. The staff report on curbside recycling included discussion of the IPC concept. Johnson asked Shoemaker to explain the IPC and the MRF. With the MRF, trash collection systems would be unchanged from current practices. At the landfill, however, waste would be unloaded into a facility. Recyclables are then separated from the waste stream, sorted, stored, and marketed. In contrast with an IPC system, recyclables would be separated from other wastes at the curb. Recyclables would be delivered separately to the IPC, then sorted, stored, and marketed. Larimer County staff are very open to a facility at the landfill. They would like to get Loveland and Estes Park involved. Shoemaker stated that after the July 16th meeting, staff will have a better idea of the feasiblility of the MRF and IPC options. Staff will also be meeting with Anhueser- Busch to determine their level of interest in participating in a processing facility. In discussion, it was noted that there is the possibility that a MRF system could lower the value of recyclable materials. It seems to have the lowest profit margin mostly due to the problem of glass in the co -mingling of materials. Will Smith reported on the Recycling Committee meeting held to review the staff proposal. Tom Norman of the Chamber of Commerce Environmental Concerns Committee and Michael Doten, of the Sierra club, were invited. Smith stated that the committee is concerned that the program is not a mandatory program. The hope is that extensive education will get responsible ethical participation from the community. There needs to be a new structure of incentives because while some people are dedicated to this behavior, other residential customers will not get involved without incentives. Shoemaker noted that some Oregon communities have a similar system but they are able to set rate structures for the haulers. Colorado state statutes do not permit government entities to regulate rate structures of private industry. Smith commented that the most efficient method would be the "pay as you throw" system. However, our license requirements prevent using that system. He is concerned about economic disincentives. Shoemaker stated that any program will have costs. Recycling is not currently a profit - making business. Ferguson commented that the profit stream is not regulated and it is something to think about. Shoemaker noted that Council specified a free-market recycling system. Ferguson stated that there are two problems with the recycling program: 1) the subscription -based program results in disincentives for participating, and 2) the program ignores the traffic, pollution, and road -resurfacing issues caused by extra trucks on the roads. There should be a way of building in incentives. Shoemaker noted that the staff proposal responds to the direction from City Council. Council specifically directed that staff develop a program that would require all trash haulers to provide service to their customers. Shoemaker noted the distinction between staff and the Board and said that the Board is free to express these concerns to the City Council. He noted that there is discussion at the County of the possibility of an Intermediate Processing Center (IPC) at the landfill. If such a facility were built, there is potential to adjust rate structures at the landfill to provide incentives for recycling. Smith stated that smaller trash hauling companies could sub- let the recycling to other haulers. Ferguson suggested that unless all haulers get a consortium together they would have to charge much more per truck. She stated that the NRAB needs to be creative in their approach when making suggestions to City Council. Shoemaker noted that people seem to be using the curbside recycling services that are now offered. Rates are dependent upon whether you already use the company's trash pickup services or not. The competition appears to be fierce and cooperation seems unlikely. Smith commented that waste oil is difficult to collect because of problems with toxicity. He also stated that co -mingling reduces the profit margin much more than using a separation system. Shoemaker noted some reasons why co -mingling was suggested. 1. Flexibility for trash haulers. 2. Trend towards co -mingling around the country. 3. Easier for trucks and equipment. Allows use of same truck for both services, which minimizes use of extra trucks on the roads. 4. There are a wide range of capabilities and abilities of haulers. Johnson asked that discussion be closed for the evening. It was recommended that the Recycling Committee meet to prepare comments to Council. The Board agreed that the committee should draft two letters with the NRAB's comments and suggestions. One letter would comment on the program direction by Council and the other would comment on the program developed by staff. Smith will set a date and time for the Recycling Committee meeting. if possible the meeting would be set at a time that would allow an update on the MRF evaluation at the same time. Because of the Board interest in the issue, it was noted that the Committee meeting might be better scheduled as a special meeting so that all board members could attend. CFC Update: Woodruff handed out material on the draft CFC proposal. This packet of information was mailed to approximately 200 PAI's (Potentially Affected Interests). The materials present the draft CFC ordinance and a summary of issues that need to be resolved before taking a proposal to Council. He will now wait to hear comments back from those who received the mailing. One important issue to be resolved is enforcement. Staff is considering three options 1) through education and voluntary compliance; 2) inspection and staff training; and 3) inspecting businesses. The enforcement approach directly affects program costs, which are of concern to Council. Woodruff asked that the Board offer input on these concepts. There was a question as to whether bans on CFC's were allowable by state laws. Woodruff responded that Bill 1400 is a ban on plastics. Council will review the CFC issue at its August 7 meeting so the Board will not have time to discuss it since the next meeting is on August 8. Johnson asked what the role of the Air Quality Task Force will be on the CFC issue. He was hoping that they would take the lead. Woodruff stated that a sub -committee of the Task Force will be reviewing it at their July 25 meeting. Johnson requested that the minutes from that meeting be forwarded to NRAB members. He urged board members to take a close look at the issue. Open Meetings: Shoemaker noted that the Council will consider the ordinance on open meetings at their July 17 meeting. The language of the ordinance is very similar to the draft the board members reviewed. Committees will not be subject to the open meeting ordinance because they cannot take formal action. The City Attorney did not modify the ordinance to require a 2/3 majority vote before closing a meeting, but noted that an amendment addressing this issue could be introduced at the Council meeting. Letter Exchange with Transportation: Johnson commented on the letter exchange between the board and the Transportation Division. Rick Ensdorff, of Transportation, sent a letter in response to the Board's letter asking that planners use alternative transportation for two weeks to aide in their study for the Transportation Plan. Ensdorff focused on bicycling in his response, stating that several planners sometimes use alternative ways to commute. Johnson asked the Board if they wanted to pursue this issue further? It was agreed that a follow-up letter would be sent inviting Ensdorff to make a presentation on the Transportation Plan to the NRAB. The Board would like the presentation to address the transportation aspects of the Harmony Corridor Plan. Ferguson asked if the Board should have comments prepared on the Transportation Plan before the next meeting. It was agreed that the presentation by Ensdorff would set the stage for Board comment. Johnson stated he would write the letter of invitation and specifically identify issues of concern to the Board including staff sensitization to alternative transportation limitations and the Harmony Corridor Plan. Woodruff noted that the Transportation Division has prepared a one - page sheet to allow comment on transportation issues. This will be included in the next mailing. e Mitigation Fund Expenditures: Johnson noted that the board needs to establish a process for evaluating proposals for mitigation fund expenditures. Shoemaker will draft a proposal for review at the August or September meeting. New Business Land Acquisition Fund: Johnson noted that there is a lot of potential for a fund for land acquisition. The NRAB should consider suggesting a fund to City Council. One to two million could be set aside so that opportunities for land acquisition can be seized when they appear. The Land Use committee should draft a short letter of support for a land acquisition fund for the board to review by September. Money for the fund could possibly come from the General Fund or from environmental impact fees. The specifics will have to be defined such as determining the percentage fee that would be needed to raise one to two million. Shoemaker noted that in the late Fall, the Natural Areas Policy Plan will be before Council. Sources probably do not need to be specified in the recommendation. Ferguson stated that the earlier the letter is written the better. The acquisition issue could explode and be on the ballot in November. Picnic at Swift Ponds: Picnic will be in September on a weekday. Swift ponds is located at the southeast portion of the Gateway Area. Shoemaker will make the appropriate contacts. Committee Reports Education: Smith stated that a form needs to be designed for nominations for the Environmental Excellence Award for distribution in November. Water: Discussed the wastewater treatment plan and felt the best direction to take may be moving downstream to a regional plant. Smith commented that the plan seemed to lack consideration of conservation issues and wondered if it should be reveiwed again later this winter. Johnson noted that metering and state laws should address conservation concerns. There is a city staff water conservation officer, but conservation efforts seem to be low profile. The City has more water than it can use. There should be an approach to keeping treatment costs down by using conservation. It was suggested that Jim Clark, the Water Conservation Officer, be invited to speak to the board. Announcements Bike Awareness Week has been set for July 23 through 28. Notification of Bike Week was a little late this year. John Deforest, an intern with the Transportation Department, was in charge of putting together the Bike Week. The next NRAB meeting will be on August 8 and will be in the Development Services Conference Room at 281 N. College. Elections for chair and co-chair will take place at the next NRAB meeting. Also, committee service choices need to be made. Eight osprey will be introduced to Fort Collins on Saturday, July 14, at Riverbend Ponds off Prospect Road. Adjournment Meeting adjourned at 9:30 pm. NRAB ACTION ITEMS JULY 11, 1990 1. Shoemaker to check and see if the Prospect Corridor Plan is being deferred. 2. Mail to NRAB members list of major issues presented on the Harmony Corridor Plan at June 25 meeting. 3. Send NRAB members copy of the workplan for the Natural Areas Plan. 4. Copy of Final Report on wastewater treatment available from Mike Smith upon request. 5. Recycling Committee to draft two letters of recommendations. 6. Recycling Committee to hold meeting regarding MRF proposals. 7. Provide NRAB with copies of Air Quality Task Force minutes when they discuss the CFC issue. 8. Council will be presented CFC issue on August 7. 9. Copy of one -page issue sheet on Transportation Plan to be included in next mailing. 10. Letter of invitation to Rick Ensdorff to speak to NRAB at next meeting. 11. Shoemaker to draft proposal on mitigation fund expenditures. 12. Land Use committee to draft letter of suggestion on a Land Use Acquisition Fund. 13. Shoemaker to make contacts regarding the Swift Ponds picnic. 14. Education committee to design form for nominations for Environmental Excellence awards. 15. Invite Jim Clark, from Water Department, to speak to the board.