Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutNatural Resources Advisory Board - Minutes - 12/17/1990MINUTES CITY OF FORT COLLINS NATURAL RESOURCES ADVISORY BOARD 281 NORTH COLLEGE - CONFERENCE ROOM SPECIAL MEETING DECEMBER 17, 1990 Board Members Present Charles Davis Dave DuBois Christine Ferguson (until 7:45) Tim Johnson (arrived at 7:20) Board Members Absent Joyce Berry (excused) Staff Members Present Tom Shoemaker Bob Wilkinson Deni LaRue Bill Miller Will Smith Harold Swope Ward Luthi (unexcused) Edith Felchle Linda Ripley Harmony Corridor Plan Linda Ripley reported that there will be a public hearing on the Harmony Corridor Plan 12/18. Council is not expected to make a decision at that meeting, but will probably vote on the direction staff should take on the plan. Therefore, NRAB comments should go to Council 12/18. Smith asked who would be at the 12/18 meeting. He said he would be there but plans to speak as a private citizen, not as a board member. Ferguson said she will speak for the board at the meeting. LaRue said she will be at the meeting as a media representative. Later, Swope said he plans to attend but will speak as a private citizen. Ripley noted the changes that had been made to the plan since the board made comments in June 1990. She said the third chapter had the most significant changes. Land Use policy #2 was rewritten to omit the export category. This category appeared to place too much limitation on the types of businesses that would be encouraged in the area. In policy #3, the restrictions (which identified destination retail, com- munity/regional shopping centers, and similar commercial as incompatible with the character of the corridor east of Timberline Road) were removed so as not to be too specific. Ferguson said that this was unfortunate. In answer to a question from the board, Ripley said retail business could be located at the 125 intersection. Ferguson asked how many traffic lights were now in the plan. Ripley replied there is one at each major arterial (approximately every mile). There was discussion about this being too many traffic lights. In response to a question about permitted land uses, Ripley said the plan lists targeted allowed uses but any use could be permitted as long as it was done as a PUD. There were questions about the administrative review provision of the EP zone, which would allow final public hearings to be conducted by the Planning Director. Ripley said that final hearings by the Planning and Zoning Board were eliminated only if the final plan was substantially the same as the preliminary plan. Projects that are not controversial, and would usually be on the consent agenda, would have the final Plan- ning and Zoning Board approval requirement eliminated. Ferguson said this puts a lot of responsibility on the public. Ripley noted that the urban design section was rewritten to promote a recreational bicycle system and a separate commuter bicycle system. originally it was assumed that a recreational system could double as a commuter system. There was discussion about whether the 1993 timeline for the route would cause action in the area that would ultimately make it impossible to build the commuter bicycle system. Ripley replied that it was virtually impossible to set a deadline earlier than 1993. There was discussion about the 80-foot set -back; Ripley was asked if the set -back had been changed. She said that it has not been changed. The 80-foot set -back is measured from the future edge of pavement. Smith asked why carpooling was mentioned in the Harmony Corridor Plan but not in the Gateway Plan. Ripley replied that it is in the Gateway section but without mention of specific location. Swope asked whose "vision" was referred to in the land use section of the plan. Ripley said it was written by staff and reviewed and edited by the Planning and Zoning Board. The Planning and Zoning Board now takes ownership of that vision. Ripley noted a change in the Gateway chapter -- a tradeoff in design restrictions. The less cumbersome review process has been taken out. The hope is that the Gateway will get special attention. Miller asked what the status of the Heritage Corridor is. Shoemaker said that staff from several departments is working with land owners who have contacted the City. Ripley said things are happening with the Harmony Corridor area simply because this plan is on paper. People have started to take notice. LaRue asked that Ripley leave the meeting so the board could discuss the comments they want to make at the 12/18 Council meeting. After discussion, it was decided that Ferguson will bring up the following points at the 12/18 meeting. - The vision of the Gateway arch on page 5-12 is a laudable feature. It shows a strong investment of the City to focus on an area that is a key entryway to the city.. - This plan is an opportunity to experiment. However, the plan does not experiment with water conservation, energy efficiency, and other environmental concerns. The vision of some may be open space and xeriscape, not a strip mall. - The vision on page 3-4 is of a major business center. Where will the focus be? Where are incentives for campus type development? - Need to mention water, energy, and open space - Mixed use is not well enough controlled to ensure that incompatible uses do not occur. - Laud the attempt to plan a large property all in one shot. It is difficult to do such large-scale planning. - There are too many traffic lights allowed in the plan. - Traffic congestion is likely. - Poor traffic flow is likely. - Maybe access should only be available to businesses from arterials. - The 80-foot set -back is not enough. - It is unacceptable that only the Director of Planning is involved in determining administrative approvals. "Controversial" is not defined. Ask what would be considered a "controversial" proposal. It was moved, seconded, and passed unanimously that these comments be put into a letter from NRAB to Council. The Land Use Committee will write the letter late Christmas week. Shoemaker asked what NRAB wanted Council do to with these comments. Smith said that NRAB cannot endorse the plan in its present form. Curbside recycling requirements Smith referred to a letter from Frank Lancaster to Shoemaker regarding probable materials the IPC could handle. Shoemaker said the City's res- olution states that the City Manager must annually designate the mater- ials that trash haulers are required to pick up. He said staff has not provided the necessary input to the City Manager because the County has not yet determined what materials can be handled at the IPC. He would like to wait until the County has more information, but we may need to make an immediate decision so trash haulers will have the required six- month notice. It was moved, seconded, and passed unanimously that newsprint, glass, aluminum, steel cans, and PET plastic would be the minimum requirements. It was stated that the letter should have a secondary paragraph stating that this list of minimum requirements does not constrain haulers from picking up additional materials. Natural Areas Policy Plan Shoemaker said that at this meeting he wants to start the board on a thinking process regarding the Natural Areas Policy Plan. He wants to let NRAB see what is out there and where we have been. There will be some key issues for discussion. Wilkinson showed slides of properties that were identified in 1988 when the Planning and Zoning Board adopted the wetland and wildlife habitat maps. He said some flaws in that system have surfaced. The Natural Areas Plan will address these concerns and incorporate new information. Wilkinson reviewed some of the rationale for natural areas' protec- tion. He noted that there is a growing concern that modern lifestyles separate humans from nature and that this separation may have adverse effects on health. He said that protecting natural areas encourages human appreciation of nature. It also fulfills goals of the Compre- hensive Plan. Wildlife habitat also has other functional values. He summarized the process that was developed for criteria and site choices with the wildlife habitat maps. He showed a series of slides that demonstrated the various ways Spring Creek has been treated and said the City may want to look at whether there should be consistent treatment of Spring Creek through Fort Collins. Wilkinson showed the wildlife habitat map that depicts areas of high and moderate concern. He said Natural Resources is now using a systems approach to these areas instead of a piecemeal approach. He said that, as a result of these refinements, there will be some reclassification of areas. Natural Resources also now has more site specific information regarding vegetation, wildlife, etc. Shoemaker showed map overlays with site -specific data on resource values, which was obtained from various groups and interest areas. Var- ious protection approaches for consideration include neighborhood wild- life areas, community wildlife areas, voluntary protection, education, expanding the Backyard Wildlife Habitat program, and acquisition. Johnson said that Shoemaker's and Wilkinson's efforts are fantastic and farsighted. He said the board needs to think about broad goals to be achieved through the Natural Areas Program. Davis asked if Parks and Recreation has access to Natural Resources' maps and overlays and if they concur with plans. Shoemaker said there is overlap with open space criteria. Council wants the open space and the natural areas programs intertwined. He said there needs to be more coordination on management. Johnson said that some natural areas acqui- sition could be funded through reduced maintenance costs resulting from taking some open space areas out of bluegrass maintenance and putting them into natural areas type maintenance. He asked staff to get back to NRAB with maintenance cost comparisons between bluegrass areas and natural areas. Johnson said he thinks a broad goal should be to inte- grate as much of the corridors that show up on the maps as possible. Smith said the intent should be to weave natural landscapes into the urban landscape so we don't live in a concrete jungle. It must be a systems process. He said unique species also must be protected; these are parcel specific. Johnson said NRAB will discuss broad goals for the Natural Areas Policy Plan at the next meeting. Wilkinson handed out a brainstorm list of policy questions for NRAB members to think about. The meeting adjourned at 9:15.