HomeMy WebLinkAboutWater Board - Minutes - 08/28/2008Fort Collins Utilities Water Board Minutes
Thursday, August 28, 2008
Water Board Chairperson City Council Liaison
Doug Yadon, 484-3611 David Roy, 217-5506
Water Board Vice Chairperson Staff Liaison
Gina Janett, 493-4677 Robin Pierce, 221-6702
Roll Call
Board Present
Chairperson Doug Yadon, Steve Balderson, John Bartholow, Mike Connor, Eileen Dornfest,
Johannes Gessler, Phil Phelan and Reagan Waskom
Board Absent
Vice Chairperson Gina Janett, David Pillard and Gary Wockner
Staff Present
Brian Janonis, Kevin Gettig, Jim Hibbard, Bob Smith, Marsha Hilmes-Robinson, Brian Varrella,
Dennis Bode, Susan Smolnik, Carrie Daggett and Robin Pierce
Guests
Judy Scherpelz, Mickey Willis and Tim Merriman, Rocky Mountain Raptor Program and The
Nature School Board of Directors; Charles Bosley, Consultant
Meeting Convened
Chairperson Doug Yadon called the meeting to order at 5:17 p.m.
Public Comment
None
Minutes of July 24, 2008, Meeting
Board Member Mike Connor moved to approve the minutes from the July 24, 2008, meeting.
Board Member John Barthalow seconded the motion, and it passed unanimously.
Floodplain Variance Hearing — Raptor Center School 720-750 East Vine Drive
Prior to convening the hearing, Chairperson Yadon requested acknowledgement for the record
from any Board members who feel they have a conflict of interest in this case. No conflict of
interest issues were noted. Quorum was established and the hearing was called to order.
Chairperson Yadon requested disclosure for the record from any Board members who had the
opportunity to visit the site in question. Board Member Steve Balderson noted his employer has a
property in the neighboring area of this site, and he was near the site today for a work -related
matter but did not visit the specific site. Board Member Phil Phelan has visited the site also, but
not for the intention of this variance. Board Member Bartholow visited the site today on the way
to the Board meeting to view the location of the property. He walked the land to note how it
fronted the road and what was behind it. He noticed the structures behind the building where
raptors are kept and some old irrigation ditches as well as large dirt mounds to the north of the
property. He questioned the history and significance of those features. Board Member Bartholow
noted nothing substantive during his site visit.
Chairperson Yadon asked for comments on these observations and noted an important procedural
objective. All considerations by the Board will be based solely upon information brought
forward at this hearing. Guest Mickey Willis noted the ditch referred to by Board Member
Bartholow was the Josh Ames Ditch, abandoned in 1971, and Mr. Willis has a copy of the City's
records on the abandonment. The mounds were part of the sugar beet process and were a
reservoir to wash sugar beets. The sugar beet factory was across the street at the old
transportation building.
Chairperson Yadon requested disclosure for the record from Board members on any ex parte
discussions they have had with members of Raptor Center staff outside of this hearing. No Board
members present reported participating in any ex parte discussions.
Chairperson Yadon asked if any parties and interests opposing this variance were present and
would like an opportunity to offer testimony in opposition to the variance. No opposing parties
were present.
Chairperson Yadon summarized the hearing procedure as contained in the Board by-laws and
from other Board training.
Step 1: Staff will explain the general nature of the variance request and make their presentation
to the Board.
Step 2: The Chair will request a presentation and testimony by the applicants.
Step 3: In the absence of any parties and interests opposing the request, the Board members will
be invited to ask questions of any witnesses, staff or applicants present for the purpose of gaining
additional information on the issues under consideration. It was noted this does not constitute the
Board's discussion prior to the vote on the variance request. The Chair asked Board members to
seek recognition from the Chair prior to calling on a particular witness for the purpose of
remaining organized during this phase of the hearing. Also, repetitious questions should be kept
to a minimum.
Step 4: Once the Board has concluded their questions of witnesses, applicants will be given the
opportunity to give a brief closing statement.
Step 5: The Chair will seek a motion and a second on the variance request. Assuming there is a
motion that is seconded, discussion will then be conducted. Upon completion of the discussion,
the Board will take the vote.
The guests listed above introduced themselves.
Staff Presentation (Floodplain Regulation Administrator Marsha Hilmes-Robinson):
The Board will be considering and taking action on a floodplain variance application for the
Raptor Center School located at 720-750 E. Vine Drive. The variance relates to the critical
facilities regulation found in City Code and the definition of a critical facility found in City Code
Section 10-16.
Critical Facility Definition: The definition states, "Critical facilities shall mean... hospitals,
nursing homes, group homes, residential care facilities, congregate care facilities and housing
likely to contain occupants who may not be sufficiently mobile to avoid death or injury during a
flood; schools; daycare facilities, ..."
Applicable City Code Sections: Staff reviewed this request based on three sections of City Code
with content applicable to the request.
1) Section 10-81(a) Critical Facilities. "In any portion of the Poudre River 500-year
floodplain zone X shaded area, critical facilities are prohibited."
Chairperson Yadon interrupted to note the arrival of Board Member Eileen Dornfest. With the
presentation just underway, he feels it appropriate Board Member Dornfest be allowed to
participate in the vote. There was agreement from the Board, applicants and staff. Chairperson
Yadon covered the same initial disclosure requests with Board Member Dornfest related to ex
parte communication with applicants, any site visit made to the property prior to this hearing or
any conflict of interest, and she answered negative to all. Chairperson Yadon also provided a
summary of Board Member Bartholow's site visit for Board Member Dornfest.
2) Section 10-81(b) Change of Use. "No person shall change the use of any
structure or property located in the Poudre River 500-year floodplain or zone
X shaded area so as to result in a new use or new nonconforming structure
that is inconsistent with the requirements of this article."
3) Section 10-46(6): "No person shall change the use of an existing structure
that is not a critical facility to use as a critical facility contrary to the
provisions of Article II of Chapter 10 of this Article, or change the use of
a critical facility to another type of critical facility, or increase the physical
area in use for a nonconforming critical facility, contrary to the provisions
of this article."
These are the only regulations that apply to the 500-year floodplain. Several regulations
referenced in previous variance requests related to floodway, floatable materials, freeboard
requirements, and other items are not applicable to the 500-year floodplain.
Variance Request:
The variance before the Board today is a two -fold request. The first part of the request is to allow
a change of use in the Poudre River 500-year floodplain for the existing structure at 720 E. Vine
Drive (Parcel #97014-23-001) to a school, which is defined as a critical facility by City Code.
The second part of the request is to allow the existing building at 720 E. Vine Drive to be
expanded with a 10,000 sq. ft. future addition for use as a school.
500-year Floodplain Information: A photo of the site showing the existing building at 720 E.
Vine Drive was shared. Ms. Hilmes-Robinson oriented the Board to the relationship of the site to
the floodplain using a color -coded regulatory floodplain map. The site is located north of Vine
Drive between North Lemay Avenue and North College Avenue. The Poudre River floodway is
represented in dark blue and the 100 year flood fringe in light blue. The site is not in the Dry
Creek Floodplain. This variance deals with the 500-year Poudre River Floodplain represented in
light green.
The area at Lemay and Vine is also in the 500-year floodplain. Two residential neighborhoods
are also in the area, Alta Vista and Andersonville to the south. The flows impacting this
particular site are related to occurrences at College and Vine. The College Avenue bridge over
the Poudre River is undersized, meaning all the water from a 100-year or 500-year flow cannot
go through. When College Avenue is overtopped on the north side of the bridge, those flows start
to go down Vine Drive. In a 500-year flow, those flows continue down Vine toward this
property.
Ms. Hilmes-Robinson pointed out three parcels on the map pertaining to this variance request,
including the parcel containing the existing building. There are small and large parcels to the east
owned by the Rocky Mountain Raptor Center. This mapping is from the FEMA-designated
Poudre River 500-year Floodplain and is shown on the FEMA flood insurance study.
The depth of flow for the 500-year floodplain is approximately one foot based on current
mapping and modeling. The total flow for the Poudre River at the 500-year level is
approximately 24,100 cfs with approximately 1,100 cfs flood flow breaking out of the area at
College and Vine and flowing down Vine toward this property.
Flood History: The City has over 100 years of stream flow record on the Poudre River from the
mouth of the canyon. Several flood events in the range of the expected 500-year discharge
included:
1) 1864 — Camp Collins was destroyed;
2) 1891 — the Chambers Lake Dam failure; and
3) 1904 — 21,000 cfs due to a rainstorm.
There are no capital improvements planned that would eliminate or reduce the 500-year
floodplain on this property, so this represents a long-term risk, considering both the history and
the future.
A graph of peak discharge flows occurring on the Poudre River was shown with a line noting the
100-year discharge at approximately 13,000 cfs. The 500-year discharge would be approximately
24,000 cfs. An event of this magnitude has not occurred in some time, and based on past history,
these events can happen, and it's a matter of time before a major event happens again.
Ms. Hilmes-Robinson shared a historic photograph of the Andersonville neighborhood to the
southeast of the proposed school sight and pointed out the high water mark from the 1904 flood
on the Poudre River. Staff draws a conclusion between the 1904 flooding level of this property
and likeliness that the school (proposed to the northwest) would have also flooded in 1904.
Flood Season: Flood season on the Poudre River generally runs from April to September. For a
large magnitude event like a 500-year flood, it would most likely be due to rainfall or rain -on -
snow, generally not snowmelt. A photo taken behind the Mulberry Water Reclamation Facility in
April 1999 depicted the most recent major flood event on the Poudre River of 4,000 cfs. Peak
flow for this rain -on -snow event was about 6,700 cfs, just under a 10-year event, with a short
duration of one day.
500-year Floodplain Risk Statistics: There is a 0.2% probability of a 500-year flood occurring in
any given year. This probability is constant for every year including back-to-back years or over a
longer time frame. However, when studying a 30-year period (the time needed to consider a
structure used as a school), there is a 6% probability over the 30-year period of a 500-year flood
occurring. When flows of 1,100 cfs coming through the site are studied, based on the existing
mapping and modeling, it's important to note the assumption the College Avenue bridge is fully
open and not blocked by any debris. If the bridge is blocked by debris, more of the water would
come over the top of College and head down Vine Drive. Therefore, the 1,100 cfs may turn into
a much greater amount of water even during a smaller event. There is a high probability of this
occurring in a 500-year flood event.
Ms. Hilmes-Robinson demonstrated where overtopping and debris blockage at the railroad trestle
or College Avenue bridge could occur on photos of the College and Vine intersection.
Risk Examples: Large floods happen in Fort Collins. The 1997 Spring Creek flood was the
biggest event to occur in Fort Collins and was greater than a 500-year flood, both from a rainfall
and stream flow standpoint. The 1976 Big Thompson flood was also an extreme event (7.5
inches of rain in 70 minutes.) Some areas of the Midwest have experienced a great deal of
flooding this year. Many of these areas have received more than one 500-year flood within a 10-
15 year period. Based on floodplain mapping and modeling, this site would be impacted in a
500-year flood.
A photo of debris blocking the College Avenue bridge at Spring Creek during the 1997 Spring
Creek Flood was shown. It was difficult to see the bridge with this amount of debris jammed
against it. Debris blocked a lot of the flow and caused overtopping on College Avenue. Debris
blockage such as this is highly likely at the College Avenue bridge at the Poudre River as well.
Purpose of Critical Facilities Regulation: The purpose of this regulation is a key issue to this
variance request. The regulation is designed to protect those facilities and people that are most
vulnerable to the impact of flooding. There are three types of critical facilities: life -safety,
emergency response and hazardous material storage. The life -safety category includes schools,
hospitals, daycares, nursing homes and group homes. Evacuation is the key issue when dealing
with life -safety issues. How do you protect the life -safety of the building occupants but also
emergency responders and others arriving to help? In the case of a school, responders would
include parents, bus drivers and emergency responders. Emergency response facilities, such as
police and fire stations, emergency operations centers and utility facilities are needed before and
after a flood. Critical facilities bear the most risk, so they also need to provide the highest level
of protection. This is why floodplain regulations have complete prohibition of critical facilities in
the 500-year floodplain.
Variance Options: Staff has prepared two variance options for the Board to consider.
Option 1: Deny the variance request in the Poudre River 500-year floodplain, based on
regulations adopted in Chapter 10 of City Code, for a change of use to an existing structure at
720 E. Vine Drive (Parcel #97014-23-001) to a school. Deny the variance request in the Poudre
River 500-year floodplain for the existing building located at 720 E. Vine Drive to be expanded
with a future addition for use as a school.
Option 2: Grant the variance request in the Poudre River 500-year floodplain to allow a change
of use of the existing structure at 720 E. Vine Drive (Parcel #97014-23-001) to a school. Grant
the variance request in the Poudre River 500-year floodplain to allow the existing buildinig
located at 720 E. Vine Drive to be expanded with a future addition for use as a school.
5
Staff Recommendation: Staff recommends Variance Option #1, denial of the variance request,
based on regulations adopted in City Code. There are sections of City Code related to variances
which outline considerations and items to be met in order for the Board to consider a variance
request. Staff has found Sections 10-28(e)(2-5,7-9) and Sections 10-29(g)(1,3) contain criteria
which have not been met related to the variance. The packet before the Board contains a
summary of each of the individual Code items and the related concerns. Staff can present these
details during another portion of the hearing if desired.
Staff concerns are contained in two primary categories:
1) Life Safety:
a) Flooding of access roads;
b) Children are not able to evacuate on their own, noting one foot of water can easily
sweep a child off their feet;
c) Students, teachers, parents, bus drivers, and emergency responders are all at risk;
d) School would be operating during a portion of the year when there is a flood risk
(April and May, a portion of August and September.) Also, procedures may
change to allow summer classes in the future;
e) There is minimal warning time of about 2 hours from the mouth of the canyon to
implement emergency evaluation plans to remove 450 students from this site; and
f) Debris may magnify the event.
The potential for loss of life and injury is staff's greatest concern about the variance request
at this particular site. Life -safety concerns are the primary reason why the critical facilities
regulations were adopted.
2) Flood Damage and Mitigation:
a) The existing building is not protected from the 500-year flood. Water will enter it,
and occupants will be exposed to floodwater during the event and clean up after
the event. The floodwaters would likely contain contaminants. There is also
potential for mold remediation afterward;
b) The applicant has not provided any information as to the structural integrity of the
building;
c) Design plans for the addition have not been supplied to reviewers;
d) A school is an integral service to the community. This variance is not just dealing
with a risk assumed by the owner. The risk extends to the students attending and
the teachers working at the school, and the emergency responders and parents
trying to reach the school to help the children. The impact of the damages to this
building does not just go to the property owner, but are a community issue
for consideration;
e) No capital improvements are planned for this area to eliminate or reduce the
500-year floodplain on this property, so it's a long term risk to be addressed and
considered;
f) There has been no voluntary site mitigation offered by the applicant; and
g) Staff feels alternative sites outside the 500-year floodplain may be available for
the school.
Summary: In the professional opinion of staff, staff has not found a good cause which outweighs
the flood risk and intent of the critical facilities regulation. The intent of the critical facilities
regulation is to protect life -safety during a flood event. The overall purpose of floodplain
regulations is based on the desire to be proactive, reduce the risk from future floods and avoid
creating problems for future generations by allowing new high -risk development or uses in the
floodplain. The critical facilities regulation is the epitome of these goals. It is difficult to mitigate
the risk of a school in the floodplain. Therefore, the regulations require schools to be located
outside the floodplain. In closing, based on the analysis outlined above, staff recommends the
Board deny the requested variance.
Applicant Presentation: "Rocky Mountain Raptor Program and the Nature School/Request for
Floodplain Variance"
Judy Scherpelz is a founding member of the Board of Directors of The Nature School (TNS) and
director of the Rocky Mountain Raptor Program (RMRP). She is joined by two other founding
members of the TNS Board, Tim Merriman and Mickey Willis, as well as Charles Bosley,
consultant.
The Nature School is a proposed charter school in the Poudre School District (PSD), co -located
with the Rocky Mountain Raptor Program, which provides a very exciting and unique
opportunity for learning. Many schools in the area have strong environmental programs;
however, this school would be truly unique, because it would provide students a rigorous
standards -based curriculum which meets all State standards with an overarching environmental
theme. In all aspects of their education, students would have a strong environmental grounding to
learn the importance of the environment. This is becoming more important in our society today
as we look at the environmental challenges to face in the upcoming years. The school has the
potential for becoming a national model for connecting children to environmental issues and
global awareness to become citizens of the planet. TNS Board members are very excited for the
opportunity this format provides and for the national interest in it. They also believe the school
supports the Fort Collins vision of a green community.
The school has a financially viable future with good sources of start-up financing for the school
plus long-term financing through the State based on a per pupil contribution.
A review packet distributed in advance of this hearing by the reviewers contained some
inaccuracies. The Nature School would be purchasing the building at 720 E. Vine Drive and
approximately 3 acres at 750 E. Vine Drive. The Nature School Board of Directors will operate
the school. There is no outside management company involved. Currently, the Raptor Program
owns the property the building sits on, and the building is owned by another entity.
Ms. Scherpelz introduced Charles Bosley to continue the presentation. Mr. Bosley noted some
points in the City's presentation are somewhat subjective and others are not entirely complete.
Mr. Bosley's purpose for speaking as an engineering consultant for RMRP is to provide
information which may lead to a more thorough understanding of the request.
The proposed project is located outside the 100-year floodplain. The expected maximum 500-
year flood depth at the proposed site is approximately one foot, a storm depth which tends to
occur frequently in the Fort Collins area without causing significant problems or long duration.
City mapping indicates the 500-year flooding at this location would present as sheet flow near
the flood fringe. This type of flow is characterized by low velocities, uniform flow field and
diminished sediment carrying capacity.
Mr. Bosley addressed the historic floods raised by the City. The 1864 flood resulted in the
relocation of Camp Collins to Old Town, perceived to be a safer location. Flood discharges for
this event have been estimated from historical accounts, but were not measured. The effect of
this event at the proposed school location remains undocumented.
The 1891 Chambers Lake event should not qualify as a natural recurring flood event. It was due
to an artificially generated dam failure.
The 1904 flood event inundated the Andersonville neighborhood, the most well documented of
the three events. It is located approximately one half mile southeast of the proposed site and
about the same distance from the Poudre River. The ground at Andersonville is 9 feet lower than
the foundation of the proposed building, a notable difference. The historical photographic record
seen shows the high water line about 5 feet above ground level in Andersonville, which would
leave the flood crest 4 feet to go before it reached the level of the proposed property. Based on
this information, the proposed site would not have been flooded in the 1904 event.
Mr. Bosley referred to floodplain statistics:
• The 0.2% chance of 12 inch depth during any given year creates a slightly less than 6%
chance of the same 12 inch depth occurring once during a sequential 30 year period,
leaving a 94% chance of that same 30-year period without a 12-inch flood depth.
• The probability of 2 sequential 500-year events is .04% or 1:250,000 chance.
• Regardless of recent reported events elsewhere in the country, the probability of a 500-
year flood is still one in 500. This is the specific criteria to which the regulation was
written, and Mr. Bosley believes this is the criteria upon which it should be evaluated.
Mr. Bosley noted the existence of several schools already in the 100-year floodplain, including
Cache La Poudre Elementary and Junior High schools immediately adjacent to the river in
Laporte. For these facilities, the odds of being flooded once during a 30-year period are slightly
less than 30% with a slightly more than 70% chance of not being flooded in the same 30-year
period. Additionally, Shepardson and Zach Elementary schools are adjacent to a 100-year
floodway, and the Poudre School District Administration Building is located adjacent to a 100-
year floodway within a 100-year floodplain. He brings these items up not to criticize the school
district, but to illustrate the fact of existing facilities for which the risk is accepted. The risk is
accepted because these facilities are considered valuable enough to accept the risk, and the risk is
mitigated by emergency management planning.
Mr. Bosley noted City floodplain maps can change. The map he was given to review does not
precisely match the map on the Fort Collins web site. As flood control facilities are constructed
and modeling is refined, the area should change on the maps, a normal process of changing and
updating to be anticipated. However, if floodplain mapping is not completely definitive, then Mr.
Bosley believes there should be some latitude for discretion in applying the floodplain
regulations. He feels this is one case that calls for such discretion.
Evacuation is not being considered as a primary flood response option, because the severity of a
projected flood would make it safer to retain students in the school. The City pointed out the
extensive risk to responding parents, especially those crossing the river, as well as risk to
emergency services personnel. TNS Board members agree and plan for evacuation to occur after
the flood crest has subsided sufficiently to allow emergency personnel to establish proper access
routes.
The existing structure is constructed of steel girder frame with sheet steel siding set on a concrete
slab foundation, a type of structure particularly good at withstanding lateral forces. Flow
velocities have not been provided by the City's stormwater staff in sufficient detail to allow
structural analysis of the building. However, since the structure conforms to City building codes,
it is reasonable to conclude the one foot hydrostatic head would possibly be two feet per second
velocity and would be small compared to the wind loading each industrial structure is required to
withstand per Code. Therefore, lateral loading of the projected flood would not propose a
problem to the structure. While exposure to floodwater inside the building is possible, if any, it
would be quite brief. Improvements to the existing structure are planned, and design plans for the
future addition will specifically address issues related to the 500-year flood.
Ms. Scherpelz noted the City reviewer suggested the possibility of alternate locations for this
site, and RMRP staff disagrees wholeheartedly on such an option. The value of this school is its
co -location with the nature center. Building the school on a different site from the nature center
would totally negate the concept of getting students outside daily to experience nature as a part
of their education. Other points of consideration were brought up related to Code Section 10-
28(e)(7) "Relationship of proposed use with floodplain management program". Given the
proposed site, applicants feel public health, safety and welfare are at very minimal risk, and this
risk is acceptable associated with flood risk projections. For example, with the issue of access to
the property during a flood, the review documents stated most vehicles would not be able to
handle a 12 inch flood depth. If evacuation and travel in that area was necessary, most high
clearance vehicles could negotiate a 12 inch depth, particularly considering the flood depths will
be of very short duration. Vehicles will not be needed on site to negotiate maximum flood depths
due to the brief period, and during the period of maximum flood depth, students would be kept in
the school in a safe manner. Once the crest has passed, the nature center would work with
emergency response teams and implement community plans to determine the appropriate access
route. The emergency response plan would include not only the safety of the students, teachers
and personnel inside the building, but also the safety of the community, emergency responders
and parents. The school would formulate an emergency response team in partnership with PSD,
local and regional response plans, and the plan would be communicated with parents in detail.
When speaking to expected flood characteristics, a 500-year event is not going to present as an
unexpected flash flood. Based on discussion with SWU staff, the Poudre River gaging system
provides 3-4 hours warning at a minimum. Being extremely conservative, the system would
provide at least 2 hours warning, sufficient time to enact an emergency plan. A 500-year event
exhibits an extremely short duration and fast rate of rise, but an equally short rate of fall. The
actual 12 inch depth would be short-lived, so exposure would be extremely brief. The Larimer
County Fleet Management yards to the west of the site are enclosed by a substantial 7 foot chain
link fence. This barrier can potentially reduce the flow velocity, giving some additional
protection to the proposed site. Considering the characteristics of the projected flood and the site,
there is some risk, but RMRP staff feels the risk is minimal and acceptable.
Related to Section 10-28(f) Variance should be the minimum necessary, RMRP staff have
requested the minimum necessary and believe the benefit of this truly unique school is a valuable
asset to the community and very likely to become a national model, factors which outweigh the
minimal risk.
0
RMRP staff does not believe this presents an additional threat to public safety. The public
interest would be better served by allowing an exception to the 500-year floodplain rule.
Questions from Board members: Chairperson Yadon clarified the intent of this discussion time is
to be confined to Board questions on testimony received, not to provide new or additional
information. If a party has asked a question, and it's apparent there is some opportunity for a
question of the other side, in fairness, the question would be welcomed then. Those at the
hearing should refrain from a rebuttal process while insuring information the Board needs to
make the decision comes forward. Chairperson Yadon issued a reminder to seek recognition by
the Chair before your question. Discussion will follow at the point of a motion and a second.
Board Member Connor asked two questions:
• Definition of a school (to applicant). The City Code is specific in pointing out a school
cannot be in a 500-year floodplain. What constitutes a school versus a training center and
would that make a difference to this discussion?
Ms. Scherpelz: This would be a charter school and part of PSD, so it would be
comparable to other district schools with the same standing.
What would be entailed in removing the structure or the property from the 500-year
floodplain (to staff)?
Ms. Hilmes-Robinson: The property could be elevated with fill and the structure
elevated above the fill, essentially creating an island. This would result in a high piece of
ground sitting on an island, depending on elevation height, protecting the structure itself
from the floodplain. It is staff's opinion this did not mitigate the risk of flooding related
to a school due to evacuation issues. Surrounding roads would still be at risk and
depending on the amount of free board.
Mr. Willis added a comment about the difference between a technical facility and a
school. In the particular zoning of the building, City Code allows for technical schools
and trade schools. However, the definition used by the City is elementary schools.
This school would offer kindergarten through 81h grade, and the majority of students
would be older. There are many definitions of schools, but zoning allows for technical
and trade schools in this building.
Ms. Hilmes-Robinson noted the existence of two separate codes. Zoning code has far
more extensive laying out of different types of schools. As seen from the critical
facilities definition in Chapter 10 of City Code, it simply says "schools" for floodplain
regulations. It does not differentiate between elementary, junior high and high
schools. By staff interpretation, no matter the grade level all the way through high
school and even a trade school, this school would be considered a school and subject to
the regulation.
Board Member Bartholow asked two questions:
• Bridge replacement (to staff). Staff mentioned there were no plans to mitigate the flood
area, and this is understandable from Utilities' standpoint, but do we know if the
Colorado Department of Transportation (CDOT) or the railroad might be replacing either
of the bridges in question in the next 5 years? Does the City have any leverage with
the railroad on this issue?
Ms. Hilmes-Robinson: Staff is not aware of any plans. The College Avenue bridge is
not very old (likely built in the early 1990s), so in considering the lifespan of a bridge and
10
other older bridges experiencing serious issues, Utilities has not heard anything from
CDOT or the railroad related to replacing these bridges. Also, there are complex issues
involved in dealing with the railroad.
Position of emergency response authorities (to staff). Has staff received an official
position from Poudre Fire Authority or other emergency management staff on this
particular variance request?
Ms. Hilmes-Robinson: Staff has not asked for their position.
Board Member Phelan asked two questions:
• Changes in the FEMA mapping (to staff). Will the mapping which is coming be based on
the work done north of town? Does the mapping change anything with the school's
proximity to the floodplain?
Ms. Hilmes-Robinson: It does not. The mapping referred to has been approved and
adopted. The mapping the Board saw today is this mapping. It relates strictly to the Dry
Creek Floodplain and greatly reduces that floodplain, but has nothing to do with the
Poudre River Floodplain mapping. We're waiting for digital information to put on the
web site from FEMA; this is the only remaining information staff is expecting. The
Poudre River will be restudied sometime in the future, and the mapping will likely
change, but when that is and what that may hold can't be said at this point.
• Have any precedences been set granting any schools variances in the floodplain,
such as Liberty Commons near Advanced Energy (to staff)?
Ms. Hilmes-Robinson: Those schools are not in the floodplain, and there have been no
variance requests come through this Board for a school in the 500-year floodplain**. The
schools in LaPorte are older schools and not in the City's jurisdiction. Utilities has
a very close working relationship with PSD, and they are cognizant of this criteria.
** For the sake of accuracy, one variance was granted for a school in a floodplain in Fort
Collins. Water Engineering and Field Services Manager Jim Hibbard referred to a
variance approved for the Wingshadow School in the Dry Creek Floodplain northwest of
this site, not related to the 500-year floodplain. The Water Board approved the
variance even though it was in the Dry Creek 100-year Floodplain. Based on memory,
part of the consideration given to the school was a Utilities capital project planned to
remove it from the floodplain. The school participated in installing a warning
System in the Dry Creek basin and hired an emergency response consultant to devise an
evacuation and emergency action plan for that particular site.
Mr. Willis added the City, not FEMA, regulates critical facilities in the 500-year
floodplain. This is important to note, because this appears to be the only property in the
country with a 500-year critical facility designation associated to it. The property is three-
quarters of a mile away from the Poudre River. The City issued a permit to store their
hazardous and floatable waste materials near the river in January -February 2007. There
are also gas and electric substations and a sewage treatment plant on the banks of the
Poudre River. There is a 6% chance in 30 years of water reaching this property, a factor
he takes into account in deciding his children will attend the school, and as a concerned
parent, he doesn't put his children in danger. The City's charge is to provide a reasonable
expectation of safety to the citizens. This plan is within this expectation.
Chairperson Yadon referred to the role of original testimony and, while these remarks are
appreciated, there will be an opportunity to recap. The Board was reminded for the record and in
11
the interest of following our procedure, feel free to seek response from the other party if felt to
be appropriate.
Board Member Waskom asked:
Has Utilities staff conferred with Poudre School District (to staff)?
Ms. Hilmes-Robinson: Staff has not directly conferred with PSD.
Ms. Scherpelz: The district is aware of this request.
Is it the applicant's position no mitigation is needed for this site (to applicant)?
Ms. Scherpelz: That is not the applicant's position. The applicant had asked Water
Utilities for more information on flood characteristics so the applicant could devise
appropriate mitigation based on the characteristics, and they did not receive the
information. As the building and site are designed, mitigation measures are planned.
Chairperson Yadon asked:
• Debris blockage (to staff). The purpose and intent of the 500-year floodplain regulations
speaks to the estimates of a 12 inch flow depth and associated sheet flow velocity, and
those estimates are based on the assumption of 0% blockage of the railroad or the street
bridge. In the event of some percentage of blockage, the estimates of flow depth and
velocity in this area would be expected to increase to some degree, depending on the
amount of blockage and the greater overflow.
Ms. Hilmes-Robinson: This is correct. The information relates to approximately one
foot depth through this area with no channel through. Sheeting occurs through
Vine Drive and across the open area. Floodplain modeling and mapping is based on
the assumption of no blockage at the railroad trestle or bridge areas. Various situations
could create additional flow and this has not been analyzed in detail. The possibility of
flow going through the low point to the north is an important factor to consider with the
existence of additional blockage.
Mr. Bosley: He has not modeled this either. Modeling a blockage of an existing structure
is not deterministic, and he agrees if the railroad bridge, College bridge or both were
blocked by debris, flow would increase east along Vine Drive. However, given the region
is a quarter mile from the intersection of College and Vine to the facility, the sheet flow
would have the opportunity to dissipate before increasing in depth. Mr. Bosley cannot
predict the increase in depth, because increased discharge is difficult to model. He notes a
conservative estimate of adding 500 cfs to the Vine Drive discharge would increase depth
a matter of inches. Given that eventuality, there would not be a significant increase in
depth in terms of the structure.
Board Member Barthalow asked:
The width of a site flow over 1,100 cfs (to staff).
Ms. Hilmes-Robinson: (Referred to the overall regulatory floodplain map to demonstrate
where the breakout occurs.) This area is fairly wide and relatively flat. In general, the
flow then tries to return to the Poudre River. Water breaks out of the river in multiple
places. One of those occurs at College and Vine, and some flow tries to get back into the
river by overtopping Vine Drive. Other water continues on to create 500-year flooding.
There is not a definitive answer.
Water Planning and Development Manager Bob Smith added 1,100 cfs represents the
flow going east down Vine Drive. The extent of the flow is from Vine north to the
edge of the green line on the map. The railroad embankment on the south side of Vine
12
does not allow the water to go across.
Chairperson Yadon asked for further questions. There were no further questions, and the
applicant was offered the opportunity for a brief closing statement.
The applicant's closing statement was given by Tim Merriman, Executive Director for the
National Association for Interpretation at 230 Cherry Street, Fort Collins. Mr. Merriman is on
the Board for The Nature School and involved with this project primarily due to his work
nationally and internationally with nature centers. Recent statistics for math and science skills of
American students reflect a ranking of about 20`h in the world. Developing nations achieve better
results in science and math programs than the United States. One area of research in his field
looks at students who have field trips or hands-on learning opportunities and how they perform
on state-wide standards in math and science. Statistics show improved performance when
contextual or experiential learning is incorporated, and this type of learning works more
effectively than theoretical learning. One other nature center in Palm Beach, Florida has a school
on its property built within the last year in an area very prone to hurricanes, and the school has
developed hurricane evacuation systems for the school and nature center. Mr. Merriman ran a
nature center on the Arkansas River in Pueblo, Colorado for 12 years which was in the 100-year
floodplain. The school managed 17,000 students per year on field trips. The property flooded
half a dozen times in 10 years, and there was never any danger to students, because staff always
knew of any incursions on the property in advance, and students were sent home. The USGS
water modeling systems in Pueblo were state of the art. He personally believes Fort Collins is
one of those model math and science communities when looking at industry and the intellectual
community at Colorado State University. If his children were younger, this is the school he
would choose for them and would desire service learning studies with birds of prey for them to
help them understand math and science concepts. It would even be a value to the students to
study the flood detention for the property and have the parents, community and students involved
in discussing mitigation and what to do in a flood event. Children need to be engaged in
understanding the danger to them. When other weather events and factors affecting school life in
Fort Collins are considered, a one foot incursion on the property is minor. This school is planned
to be a state of the art facility in science and math studies with an opportunity to look at
mitigation and have an evacuation plan that makes it a zero potential risk for incidents. He feels
variances exist in the hands of citizens for good reasons when you make reasonable judgments to
allow an exception. In closing, Mr. Merriman and the applicants hope the Board will see the
unique and wonderful opportunity here. Moving the school to another site removes the daily
experiential opportunity. The challenge to do something constructive and work around any
obstacles should be embraced. The applicants hope the Board will approve the variance.
Motion for recommendation:
A motion on the variance was entertained by the Chair.
Board Member Connor moved the Board deny the variance request in the Poudre River 500-year
floodplain, based on regulations adopted in Chapter 10 of City Code, for a change of use of an
existing structure at 720 E. Vine Drive to a school and also deny the variance request in the
Poudre River 500-year floodplain as to the existing building located at 720 E. Vine Drive to be
expanded with a future addition for use as a school. The City Code uses very strong language
and is very explicit about having this kind of structure in the 500-year floodplain. Board Member
Johannes Gessler seconded the motion.
13
Discussion on the motion:
Board Member Connor noted his desire to support this wonderful concept and proposal and feels
there is a strong case to appeal to the next level to challenge whether the City Code is overly
restrictive. This is not the Board to override the guidance provided in the City Code regulations.
He would like to support it and would enjoy involvement in some of the activities, but cannot
support this variance request given the way City Code is currently written.
Board Member Bartholow basically agrees with Board Member Connor and is very sympathetic
to the goals of the school. The applicants brought up some very good points, but the regulations
are there for a very good reason through some difficult lessons the City has learned. He
recognizes some uncertainties and gray areas between the mapping, modeling and all aspects. He
would personally entertain another opportunity to look at this variance if the applicants prepared
an emergency response plan in conjunction with the appropriate emergency response authorities
and demonstrated good faith in the structural plans for the existing and future buildings.
Chairperson Yadon asked whether Board Member Connor and Board Member Gessler would
consider a friendly amendment to the wording of the motion. He suggested wording to be added
to reflect there has not been a sufficient showing of good and sufficient cause to grant this
particular variance in both points (conversion of existing facility and expansion of this facility as
a school in the 500-year floodplain), and the granting of the variance in fact would present an
additional threat to public safety and the public in general beyond the current condition at the
site. Board Member Connor did not agree to the friendly amendment. The second part of the
statement gives him concern.
Vote on the motion:
Seeing no other discussion, a vote was taken, and it passed unanimously (8 for, 0 against.)
Drinking Water Quality Policy Annual Report
Water Resources and Treatment Operations Manager Kevin Gertig shared highlights from the
2007 Drinking Water Quality Policy Annual Report. This item was initially made available in
the June meeting packet.
Staff provides this policy report each year to City Council and the Water Board. Fort Collins
receives many inquiries from other Front Range cities and states about our policy. The policy
establishes several important goals including our goal to provide water services that meet or
exceed customer expectations for quality, quantity and reliability. Our customer satisfaction
performance is measured through the QualServe benchmarking program using 22 high-level
water and wastewater performance indicators. We work in collaboration with American Water
Works Association (AWWA) and the Water Environment Federation (WEF).
Mr. Gettig is proud to announce two awards. The Lower CLP Monitoring Program received an
Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) Award for Environmental Leadership in 2007. Over 40
miles of stream have been monitored in this unique program since the 1970s. The vision for a
comprehensive data collection system from the top of the pass to Greeley was noted. Utilities
was also awarded the Colorado Environmental Leadership award at the bronze level for the
second year in a row for our work in environmental stewardship and energy conservation at the
water treatment facility.
Report highlights include:
14
* Regional services lab: The Water Quality Lab offers services in keeping with the vision
to be a regional lab providing water, wastewater and analytical services. Our lab is
certified, which is unusual compared to other entities. A dozen different Front Range
agencies are currently using the lab for services.
* Instream flow measurement: Discharge is down at Joe Wright Reservoir, and technology
has provided a way for instream flow measurement year-round. A signal goes through
space to a satellite for real time flow measurement data at the reservoir.
* Operational excellence: We will be submitting data for the Partnership for Safe Water.
* Unique training opportunities: An elite urban search and rescue team used some of our
facilities for training. They provide a unique place for emergency response personnel to
train, and the training provides familiarity to our facilities should there be an incident.
* Sustainability: Utilities is working diligently toward sustainability through the 21"
Century Utility project. An energy audit was performed to identify opportunities for
immediate improvements. An electric vehicle with PV solar panels on top has been used
at the plant site.
* Security: Security enhancements are underway based on a vulnerability assessment and
mathematical vulnerability of each facility.
* Cross connection controls: Work continues to maintain a very active cross connection
control system. For example, any irrigation system must be inspected on a routine basis.
* Corrosion controls: Coordination occurs with water production and reclamation on a
corrosion control program to address an increase in levels of copper and lead. This is
thought to be due to an increase in residence time resulting from less water use. Copper
can inhibit corn production and plant growth. This program was a decade ahead of any
regulations. Levels are still far below the minimum level and are being measured at
various sites in the distribution system.
* Cooperation with other water providers and users: Of note, we are working with the
City of Albuquerque on their new treatment plant. They are intrigued by our conventional
process and staff and sent their staff to shadow our staff for 4-5 weeks.
s Fluoride: We continue to receive correspondence from a half dozen citizens concerned
about fluoride. Cost of fluoride continues to increase, and there is a nationwide shortage
which has impacted us at times for short durations. The EPA has not offered any new
research.
Cost of treatment: Costs will continue to increase, including chemical costs. In some
cases, chemicals have increased as much as 330%. This presents a challenge with
revenues decreasing as a result of less water use and conservation efforts.
American Water Works Association Research Foundation (AWWARF) Joint Front Ranee
Climate Change Vulnerability Study
Water Resources Manager Dennis Bode presented this important study and seeks a
recommendation from the Board. Due to our involvement with other municipalities through an
intergovernmental agreement (IGA), the City Attorney's Office has determined this needs to go
before City Council. This study represents an opportunity for collaboration with other water
providers along the Front Range. AWWARF approved the proposal last month, and work on the
funding agreement is underway. The primary objective of the study is partly educational and
designed to help with understanding how to process some of the information from global climate
models and translate it for run-off numbers. Project deliverables include sets of native flows for
the Poudre River and statistical reports on climate change. Participants are contributing $120,000
and AWWARF is contributing $80,000 to the project, with an additional $200,000 of in -kind
services with the project.
15
Motion for recommendation:
Board Member Waskom moved the Water Board recommend City Council endorse participation
in this IGA and fund Fort Collins' share of the study. Board Member Connor seconded the
motion.
Discussion on the motion:
There was no discussion.
Vote on the motion:
The vote was taken, and it passed unanimously with one abstention (7 for, 0 against, 1
abstention.)
Committee Reports
Engineering Committee (Board Member Balderson): At the last meeting, the committee
reviewed the FEMA community rating system. The City voluntarily participates in it, and our
practices are considered best management practices for performance and participation in the
program. The City of Fort Collins is rated #4 in the nation in terms of our stormwater utility
rating, resulting in a fairly significant reduction in insurance premiums for homeowners in the
floodplain. Board Member Bartholow noted the program covered a breadth of objectives and
reflects a quality job being done across the board.
Treated Water Production Summary and Water Supply Outlook
Water Resources Manager Dennis Bode included this information in the packet. We are using
much less water than predicted.
Other Business
Utilities Executive Director Brian Janonis mentioned the long-awaited NISP information is on
the web site and copies of the agenda item summary will be provided to Board members.
Suggestions for future agenda items can be forwarded any time to Robin Pierce. Please copy Mr.
Janonis, Chairperson Yadon and Vice Chairperson Janett.
Adjournment
The meeting was adjourned at 7:23 p.m.
Submitted by Robin Pierce, Executive Administrative Assistant
Fort Collins Utilities
Approved by the Board on , 2008
Signed
Robin Pierce Date
16