Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutNatural Resources Advisory Board - Minutes - 06/20/1989MINUTES CITY OF FORT COLLINS NATURAL RESOURCES ADVISORY BOARD WORK SESSION JUNE 20, 1989 Board Members Present: Charles Davis Tim Johnson Denise LaRue Board Members Absent (excused): Suzanne Bassinger Dave DuBois Staff Present Brian Woodruff Bob Wilkinson Ari Michelsen Susan Whitmer Ward Luthi Bob Sanz Edith Felchle Kari VanMeter (Planning) The work session was called for the purpose of discussing the National Recreation Area Draft Report. Kari VanMeter, National Recreation Area project manager, said she wants to hear what the board's concerns about the report are including technical comments. Ultimately, she would like a resolution from the board endorsing pursuit of National Recreation Area designation. She said that others have adopted such resolutions including the Downtown Development Authority, Larimer County Parks, and the Poudre River Trust. She said the final public meeting will be June 30 and the final document should be prepared by the end of July. After review by City Council and County Commissioners, the final report must be in to the Secretary of Agriculture by the end of October. She felt that a significant finding from NRAB's perspective is the conclusion that there are no negative environmental impacts. She stressed that the study does not propose to change the river but rather that the working river concept boils down to accepting the river for what it is. Education will be a main focus of the area, and the Forest Service and other relevant entities consider education to be recreation. Recreation proposed for this part of the river are low impact types. Proposed dovetailing of natural resources management and recreation is done in a very natural manner. She said the "desirable land base" concept is important here because it means that the National Recreation Area will not be forced anywhere that it is not wanted. She said, that a commonly asked question is, "What are we getting that we cannot do ourselves?" She said that it gives us a management goal that is already based on things we believe in and that having Federal partners means we can enter into Federal land scenarios, obtain Federal funding, and receive national recognition. She said that the decision needed at this point is merely, "yes, we deem this to be worthwhile." At this time, there is no need to select a scenario or to decide who the Federal partner will be. If the ultimate decision is that the National Recreation Area concept is worthwhile to pursue, a three—year study will then occur during which a scenario will be chosen. At that time VanMeter's recommendation will be the Centennial Theme. During that three—year period, the enabling legislation will be written and the City can expect to be heavily involved in how that legislation will be worded. She said that some people are scared of the Federal government. Her response is that the Federal government wants control to be at the local level in national recreation areas. They would act as the main coordinator but leave management to the local level. Roles and responsibility can be negotiated during the three—year planning period. She said that a recommendation for the National Recreation Area does not necessarily mean we will have one. iust that a suitabilitv stndv will he Board members felt that since Hank Brown asked local people to write the legislation for the Wild and Scenic designation, and since he is involved in the National Recreation Area designation, it would probably proceed the same way. Concern was expressed that the report needed an executive summary of salient points, possibly in bullet fashion, listing such things as criteria, benefits, etc. The report needs to clearly state its objectives, findings, and recommendations. It must also indicate what the alternatives are and what will happen if a recommendation for the National Recreation Area is made. There was concern that in the Centennial Theme scenario, some buildings would be in the floodway, and a desire to keep major facilities out of the floodway was expressed. It was stated that the National Recreation Area concepts seem to fit closely with the City's wetlands plan and that, if designation occurs, it could help with purchase of valuable wetlands. In response to questioning, VanMeter said that the National Recreation Area is pretty much in keeping with the new Downtown Development plan. She added that if business relocation is desired, many businesses may be happy to relocate, if a reasonable trade can be made, because the utility infrastructure in the present area is in bad shape. It was stated that it was surprising what a tiny percent of open space is indicated on the table on 3-11, and it was asked what percent will be open space in the 3 alternatives. VanMeter said she doesn't know. It was stated that a table like the one on 3-11 was needed for each concept. VanMeter said that the land owners who are expressing negative concerns are a small group in a definite geographic area. She said that business is trying to approach this open—minded. Specific questions about Sterling gravel mining were raised and she said Sterling is taking a low key approach. It was stated that in Section seven of the report, it was difficult to identify the alternatives and that a summary page and a table or matrix to compare alternatives would be helpful. VanMeter said that, overall, the National Recreation Area will be a showcase example of western water management. This is the uniqueness of this particular National Recreation Area. It was stated that from the report it was difficult to get a sense of why we need the National Recreation Area. It was stated that it would be helpful to add a schedule that shows where we go from here. There was some discussion of the use figures quoted in the report. Initial reaction was that they were probably high, but further discussion indicated that they may be reasonable estimates. VanMeter said those figures were difficult for the consultant to estimate because there are no comparable figures for the local area. Michelsen will work on wording for the resolution and will bring it to the board at the July 5 regular meeting. The meeting adjourned at 8:30.