Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutNatural Resources Advisory Board - Minutes - 02/06/19916 MINUTES CITY OF FORT COLLINS NATURAL RESOURCES ADVISORY BOARD REGULAR MEETING 281 N. COLLEGE AVE. - CONFERENCE ROOM FEBRUARY 6, 1991 - 7:00 P.M. Board Members Present Tim Johnson Harold Swope Will Smith Ward Luthi Chuck Davis Bill Miller Board Members Absent (excused) Christine Ferguson Deni LaRue Dave DuBois Staff Members Present Tom Shoemaker Julie Bothwell Brian Woodruff Joe Frank Sherry Albertson -Clark John Daggett Guests Present George Figueroa Becky Malecki Len Loomans Minutes It was moved, seconded, and unanimously approved that the Minutes of January 2, 1991 NRAB meeting be accepted as presented. Bev Business Fort Collins Zoological Society George Figueroa and Becky Malecki from the Fort Collins Zoological Society were present to summarize the proposal for a zoo in Fort Collins. Malecki stated that their organization has been working on this project for about 12-18 months. The newspaper article on the proposal was premature in the sense that they have not worked out all the details. She stressed that the organization is formulating a proposal and is open to ideas from throug out the community. Figueroa outlined the zoo proposal as follows: + Approximately 35 acre site, hopefully along the Poudre River. Three possible sites are I-25 and Harmony, a site north of Martinez Park, and a site north of the proposed Timberline Road + Display would focus on temperate species, probably including Rocky Mountain species, as well as counterparts from throughout the world. + The zoo would use the state -of -the art "habitat immersion" concept in which the displays are quite naturalistic; the zoo would not be the type of "caged environment" that most people envision. + The zoo would involve the community in a variety of conservation education programs and provide many opportunities for volunteers. The zoo would also have links to Colorado State, in terms of conservation research, veterinarian training, and other aspects. + Although a feasibility study is planned, the society currently envisions a public/private partnership in which the City or other public entity would own the zoo and a private organization would operate it. Estimated costs for development are about $5 million. Johnson asked if the proposal would be to fund the development costs through a sales tax increment. Figueroa said that this was their thinking at present and they would expect to place the matter before the voters sometime in 1991. Swope commented that a zoo could be a valuable asset for Fort Collins, but he was concerned about potential competition for funds, particularly for open space or natural area acquisition. Figueroas noted that their might be ways of combining the two interests to meet everyone's needs. Johnson asked that the Board be kept informed of further developments on the proposal. Figueroa and Malecki said that since they are still defining the proposal, they would welcome ideas from the Board or others. Staff Reports Water Treatment P1ant.No. 1 Mike Smith, Director of Water and Wastewater, provided an update on the progress of opening the old Water Treatment Plant site for recreational use. He noted that an agreement between the City, State Parks, and the State Highway Department had been reached several years ago, but the project had been stalled due to a disagreement between the two state agencies. He noted that the difficulties are now resolved and a draft of the lease for the access road was given to the State about a week ago. Johnson asked if the difficulties between the state agencies are resolved and Smith said they were. The project should now move forward. Once the access road is ready, the entry way will be developed and then the area will be opened up for fishing, 6 kayaking, and rafting. Will Smith asked if there was a time limit on the agreement and Mike Smith replied that the agreement was for five years with a five year option for renewal. After that time, it will be reevaluated. Mike Smith asked if the Board had time for a quick update on several other matters and Johnson said yes. Smith noted that the water department is exploring several land exchanges with the Forest Service. He noted that Fort Collins and Greeley both own land in the Rockwell area and, since the Rockwell reservoir is not feasible, the City is interested in exchanging the land for land around Joe Wright Reservoir. The City is interested in having greater control over potential uses around Joe Wright in order to protect the city's water supply. Smith noted that the City is doing some studies around Halligan Reservoir and has filed for conditional water rights for additional storage at the site. He noted that if additional storage is needed in the future, expanding Halligan Reservoir seems to be the most promising, most environmentally acceptable alternative. Smith noted that an important issue regarding any potential expansion of Halligan is the fact that the conditional rights are junior to those of the Northern Colorado Water Conservancy District for Gray Mountain Reservoir. NCWCD has recently refused to subordinate Grey Mountain water rights to Halligan. This means that either Gray Mountain or a Halligan expansion might be feasible in the future, but not both. Fort Collins currently has no plans to store water in the NCWCD's proposed Grey Mountain Reservoir. In response to questions from the Board, Smith noted that the Halligan expansion, if pursued, would enlarge the reservoir from 6,500 acre-feet to about 33,000 acre-feet at a cost of about $18 million with a firm annual yield of 9,000 acre-feet. This is the lowest cost alternative for water storage for Fort Collins. He noted that the city would own the entire reservoir, perhaps adding at some time in the future a unique recreational resource to the City's inventory. Proposed Energy Conservation Measures Joe Frank and Sherry -Albertson Clark were present to review two projects related to energy conservation: a report on solar access/solar orientation and proposed revisions to the Land Development Guidance System (LDGS) for non-residential developments. Frank summarized the written report that was supplied in Board packets. He noted that the intent of his project was to identify ways of encouraging residential developers to take advantage of the potential energy gains that can be achieved by orienting buildings to take advantage of solar energy. He noted that the report outlines a variety of approaches, including several steps that could be taken to encourage solar orientation and other steps that could be taken to require solar orientation in new development. He asked for the Board's views on the direction to be taken and noted that he would be seeking Council direction on the 26th of February. Albertson -Clark said that the intent of her project was to clarify the way that incentive points are awarded within the LDGS review for energy conservation measures included in non- residential development. She provided an overview of her report and a summary of the process used within the LDGS. She noted that the report outlines two ways of assigning points, one that would be based on a total systems evaluation of the conservation savings of a building and one that would be based on the incorporation of specified energy conservation measures into a building design. In either approach, two points would be awarded for energy conservation savings of 15-25%, four points for savings of 26-35%, six points for savings of 36-45%, and eight points for savings greater than 46%. Albertson -Clark noted that she would like the Board's recommendations on the proposed changes prior to the meeting of the Planning and Zoning Board on February 25. During the presentation Smith asked for clarification of the "baseline" for comparison. Albertson -Clark clarified that all developments must meet the standards set by the model energy code. The project addresses conservation steps that go beyond the model energy code. Smith asked if the energy conservation incentives were used much by developers. Albertson -Clark noted that 44 of 125 applicable projects used the energy conservation incentive in the period between 1985 and 1990. Of those, 35 needed the incentive points to meet the minimum point requirements of the LDGS. Luthi asked if the scope of the investigation was too limited -- that options for mandatory energy conservation were not considered. Albertson -Clark stressed that the scope of her project was only to clarify the manner in which points were awarded within the LDGS point charts because there has not been a clear methodology in the past. The scope was limited only to the single criterion in the LDGS and not to broader issues of what else might be done to encourage or require energy conservation. Johnson asked the Board to discuss its proposed recommendations on both projects to Council and the Planning and Zoning Board. Based on the questions during the presentations, he suggested that the board might want to address two questions: whether the proposals adequately addressed their intended scope of providing clear standards, and whether additional steps ought to be taken to address energy conservation, for example setting a minimum conservation standard. Smith said that the criteria proposed by Albertson -Clark were clear and would do a good job of clarifying how points are awarded. He noted his concern that they still may not be used because energy conservation is only one of several categories of incentive that could be used. Johnson noted that the Board might want to recommend that a minimum level, for example 25% conservation might be included. Swope agreed, stating that energy conservation is too important to be left to voluntary use. Johnson asked for a motion. Davis moved and Swope seconded that the Board send a letter to the Planning and Zoning Board stating that the criteria and methods developed by Albertson -Clark provide needed clarification to the LDGS point charts and urging that a mandatory level of 25% be added to the LDGS requirements. The motion carried 4-1-1. Luthi opposed the motion because it did not go far enough in making a statement that a mandatory energy conservation policy and program needs to be developed and implemented. Smith abstained because he felt the 25% target was arbitrary and was unsure if it was the correct target. Following the motion, Luthi expressed concern that not everyone was certain of the content of the motion before the vote. Johnson asked if this was true. The rest of the board agreed that they understood the motion before voting. Johnson asked the board for their recommendations regarding the solar orientation report presented by Frank. Smith moved and Swope seconded that the board should recommend to Council that the Planning -staff proceed with the development of a mandatory program to require that consideration of solar orientation in the planning and approval of residential developments. Swope commented that requirements needed to be specified because voluntary programs haven't seemed to work. Smith asked if the board needed to specify what level of requirement should be imposed at this time and Frank replied that staff would bring the specific program back to the board. Smith said that it was important that Council be aware that this was only the first step; additional requirements might be needed to ensure that buildings actually utilize solar technology. It was agreed to add that comment to the board's recommendation. The motion passed 5-0. 1991 Natural Resources Symposium Shoemaker reported that the 1991 Natural Resources Symposium is set for April 24. The format this year will be an Environmental Film Night, with a variety of films on environmental issues, followed by speakers or panel discussions. Staff is currently planning a format involving three rooms at the Lincoln Center. Room one would be for children and family -type films. Room two would be set up for longer films and structured panel discussions. Room three would be a potpourri of environmental and natural resource topics. The schedule will be set so that people can move in and out of the rooms. There will also be displays and literature tables. General Updates Shoemaker noted that on February 5, 1991, Council adopted a resolution that supports a moratoriumon on burning hazardous or toxic substances in cement kilns until such time as regulations are in place, acceptable emission standards, regulatory review processes, and enforcement and monitoring requirements have been adopted and implemented. The resolution came about because Representative Redder had introduced a bill along these lines. Council chose to make a broader statement about the concept of a moratorium and the information needs to satisfy public concerns about these proposals, rather than focus on Redder's bill. The resolution passed Council seven to zero. Shoemaker said that he expects to bring the EMP Framework report to the Board the next meeting. The report will provide documentation of the action agenda which the board previously acted on. Shoemaker noted that the Natural Areas Policy Plan is progressing. He expects the plan to be released for board and public review in mid- to late -March. Old Business Transportation Plan Mission Statements. Smith reported on the meeting of the Board Chairs. He noted that the ad -hoc Transportation Committee is developing a mission statement for the Transportation Plan that consists of six different portions. 1. Mission statements and overall objectives 2. Public transit plan 3. Bicycle plan 4. Pedestrian plan 5. Other modes plan 6. Auto transportation Plan. Of the six, four have been written and two were in discussion at the meeting. The schedule is to take these policy statements to Council on March 26, 1991. The meetings of the Board chairs are intended to facilitate communication among boards on the draft statements. Smith said that the Ad -Hoc Transportation committee is going to try and have automobile statements by February 12. The board chairs are going to meet again on February 14, and an NRAB recommendation will be needed early in March. Smith expressed two concerns at this stage. He said that the general mission statment contained vague wording about encouraging economic development. He said that his view was that the Transportation Plan should support the transportation needs of the future community, but should not by itself promote economic development. He also noted that the Ad -Hoc Transportation Committee seems to be supporting construction of the Timberline extension and the Highway 14 Bypass to reduce congestion in the city, reduce delay time at intersections, and improve air quality. His question is whether this is true in the long run. Woodruff said that there is the perception that completing the Timberline extension and building the Highway 14 bypass to get truck traffic out of town would help air quality. In the short term that is right; if you improve the street system and keep traffic moving rapidly you take one congested street and divide the traffic between two streets you have less congestion. Traffic moves more quickly and produces less pollution per mile driven. Woodruff noted that this approach also produces higher vehicles miles of travel. He noted that the Air Quality Task Force uses the concept of supply and demand. The supply side looks at supplying streets and the efficiency of the streets. The demand side looks at better carpool programs, more bike lanes, better pedestrian systems, vanpools, telecommuting and other techniques that reduce demand. The AQTF is promoting the idea of managing both supply and demand --supplying better road networks and reducing the demand for travel at the same time. Smith said he will continue to work with the Board chairs, primarily with the aim of improving the incentives for alternative modes of travel. Woodburning Ordinance Woodruff gave an update on the Woodburning Ordinance. Staff is taking an ordinance to council February 19 which would ban further installations of woodburning fireplaces in the city. If passed, the ordinance would require installation of natural gas logs, an electric appliance, or a woodstove insert that meets State requirements. He noted that the Board had the opportunity to advise Council on the proposed ordinance. The Board moved, seconded, and unanimously passed a recommendation to support the proposed ordinance. Committee Revorte Recycling Committee Smith reported that the bill by John Irwin to allow local governments to require trash haulers to charge customers according to volume or weight was killed nine to three in committee. Shoemaker noted that the County Commissioners and Council took a strong in getting the bill introduced. The Colorado Municipal League and the County organizations both supported it and gave testimony on it together. Smith said that he is working on some goal statements for the recycling program and will bring them to the April or May meeting. He notified the board members that Nelson Metals was now taking magazines. Announoements Luthi made the comment that if any board member is confused about a motion that it needs to cleared up before going ahead and making a vote. Johnson apologized to Luthi. He stated that he thought everyone was clear about the motion. Adjournment The meeting adjourned at 10:10 p.m.