Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutNatural Resources Advisory Board - Minutes - 01/21/2009I NATURAL RESOURCES ADVISORY BOARD MINUTES Regular Meeting January 21, 2009 DATE: Wednesday, January 21, 2009 LOCATION: 215 N. Mason - Conference Room 1-A TIME: 6:00pm For Reference: Alan Apt, NRAB Chair 221-9875 Ben Manvel, Council Liaison 217-1932 John Armstrong, Staff Liaison 416-2230 Board Members Present: Clint Skutchan, Phil Friedman, Ethan Billingsley, Heather Manier, Alan Apt, Liz Pruessner, Board Members Absent: Glen Colton, Joe Piesman Staff Present: Natural Resources Department: Alexis Hmielak, John Armstrong Call meeting to order - Alan Apt called the meeting to order at 6:05 p.m.. Introduction of Guests — Eric Sutherland, Steve Ambrose, Ann Hutchinson from Fort Collins Chamber of Commerce Agenda Review — none Public Comments: 'Citizen guest Eric Sutherland addressed the NRAB with two concerns: • First, he stated the City needs to take a hard look at CSU's wind farm proposal at Maxwell Ranch. It was his understanding the City of Fort Collins' and Larimer County's purchase of Red Mountain Open Space and Soapstone Prairie Natural Area was to protect those ecosystems. It was Eric's opinion that, even though he is an advocate for clean energy, the CSU wind farm at Maxwell Ranch would disrupt the environment. He also felt that CSU has misrepresented this project regarding the adverse environmental effects, their ability to integrate the wind power into the grid and have backup for the wind power. Eric suggested the NRAB invite someone from CSU to come and present the wind farm project. • Second, Eric stated he had problems with the proposed service code change presented last month by Steve Catanach of Fort Collins Utilities. He felt the rationale to recommend this code change is erroneous. Xcel energy cannot poach HP's business from Fort Collins. It is impossible under the state law. The only way they could do it is if HP told the PUC they were not being adequately served. Any code change Council makes would be subservient to state law. There have been other communities in the US that have to deal with regulating third party utilities. Eric suggested the NRAB investigate how those communities are making it work. In conclusion, Eric asked the NRAB to recommend to Council that they not pass this service code change as it is currently proposed. • Alan Apt stated Steve Catanach will return to the NRAB at the February 2009 meeting for a recommendation and the board will look into scheduling a presentation about CSU's project at Maxwell Ranch. • Phil Friedman agreed that ways need to be identified to allow renewable energy to be added to the utility grid that will benefit everyone. Review.and Approval of Minutes: December 17, 2008 Clint Skutchan asked the following text to be substituted on page 9 for his comments on the Bicycle Advisory Committee: "Alan suggested Clint would be liaison to the Bicycle Advisory Committee and would communicate board concerns as well as represent his own views." Liz Pruessner moved and Clint Skutchan seconded.a motion to approve the December 17, 2008, NRAB minutes as amended. Motion passed 5-0 Phil Friedman abstained since he was not present at that meeting. Trash Services Study update Ann Turnquist from the City Manager's Office gave an update on the Trash Services Study. • Her purpose at the meeting was to share comments from City Council and to get feedback from the NRAB about this issue. • In December, Ann's group gave Council 47 alternatives for trash districting, including regulatory and market options. Instead, Council chose an option they didn't offer. Council asked her group to institute a pilot trash districting project in one area of the City to see how well it works. • Ann pointed out one of handouts in the meeting packet had a prioritized list of regulatory changes Council was interested in pursuing, with the following highest priority items to be implemented first: o Pay -As -You -Throw (PAYT) Ordinance Enhancements o Require haulers to offer large, 65 gallon, single -stream recycling toters which: ■ Should increase recycling efforts and enable haulers to only pick up bi- weekly. ■ Haulers can charge for them or charge a deposit if they want. o Find ways to monitor truck weights. (Because it is basically a budget issue it will probably be implemented later.) o Establish additional reporting requirements for residential haulers. o Districted trash service In answer to a question from Phil Friedman, Ann Turnquist explained the City's ability to regulate things is more difficult in an open market. Therefore, Council has not discussed mandating everyone use a. trash truck with a mechanical arm or customers use the same rolling cart. • Ann stated they are waiting for Council to give them timing on the above two legislative issues (PAYT and larger toters). • Ann's group is working on the pilot project to determine the neighborhood and criteria it should have. In answer to a question from Clint who thought the wording was confusing, Ann clarified for Clint that the chosen neighborhood would be diverse, with little or no HOAs and one currently served by several trash haulers. o Ann also pointed out setting up the pilot project would also include input from the haulers regarding number of houses served to be profitable, the purchase of new equipment and a time period for the pilot project in which they can amortize this equipment. o Ann also stated they have been talking with the haulers and are aware of their concerns about the economy and bad recycling markets. N • Ann stated the timeline remains to be determined. She will return to the NRAB when they have drafted the pilot project. • Clint Skutchan stated he is concerned about the overall quality of mandatory cardboard recycling, especially from packaging that has plastic and twist ties in it since many people don't fully understand the recycling process. Ann responded the haulers keep an eye out for this and agreed it is -a training issue for the public. o Ann pointed out if more than 7% of the single stream load is contaminated, the recycle center can reject the load. The haulers need to educate their customers. o Clint also wondered why the open competitive market was designated as "low" status. He suggested it be raised to a "medium" status. , North I-25 Draft Environmental Impact Statement Kathleen Bracke, Transportation Planning & Special Projects Director addressed the group regarding the CDOT North I-25 draft Environmental Impact Statement. • Kathleen stated the purpose of her visit was share where they are in the process and to get feedback to share with CDOT as they move forward with the EIS process this year. She also handed out a newsletter from the North I-25 EIS with an overview of the project. • CDOT released the draft EIS document at the end of October, 2008, with a 60-day comment period. CDOT has extended the comment period and Kathleen encouraged the group to comment if they wanted to. CDOT is hosting a community workshop in Denver on January 22, 2009, and Ben Manvel plans to attend. He was appointed Council liaison in Diggs Brown's absence. • Kathleen also informed the group they can contact CDOT on line or through a link from the Transportation website. The NRAB can also give their comments to her and she will pass along to CDOT. She pointed out there were several opportunities to give input on this project. o Public Review - Oct 31 to Dec 30 o Hardcopy available at 26 locations o Public Hearings ■ Nov 18 - Longmont ■ Nov 19 — Fort Collins ■ Nov 20 — Loveland o Web Access, throughout review period • The City's Transportation staff has reviewed the document and has been involved with CDOT on a technical advisory committee. They provided top level comments from various departments and Council. CDOT projects it will take a year before the EIS is finalized. Kathleen presented a Power Point presentation prepared by CDOT to the group. She also provided the comments from Council regarding the EIS for the NRAB to read. It was her intention to add the NRAB's comments to this list and share with CDOT. The purpose of the North I-25 EIS is to meet the long-term travel needs between the Denver metropolitan area and the growing population centers along the I-25 corridor north to the Fort Collins -Wellington area. The goal is to determine the long-term picture for regional transportation. • Needs of the I-25 corridor project are: safety concerns, aging infrastructure, mobility and accessibility and modal alternatives. o CDOT's definition of the I-25 Corridor is from US-287 on the west to US-85 on the east and from Denver on the south and Wellington on the north. 3 • CDOT has developed two alternative packages, the components of which can be mixed and matched. o Package A ■ The I-25 interstate improvements would widen one lane in each direction, for use as general purpose lanes. ■ The west transit component would have commuter rail service on the existing Burlington Northern Santa Fe railroad track plus one new track from Fort Collins to downtown Longmont. It would stop at the Fort Collins downtown transit center, CSU and the Fort Collins' proposed new south transit center. It would then go south and tie into RTD's FasTrack system in Longmont and continue south to either Denver or Boulder. ' ■ The east transit component would be express bus service down US 85 from Greeley to the Denver metro area and then along E-470 to Denver International Airport. o Package B ■ Most of the improvements would be along 1-25 rather than in the population centers along the edges. ■ Bus service would begin at the Fort Collins' new south transit center on Harmony and then down the center of I-25 in two high -occupancy tolled lanes with 12 bus stations. ■ There would also be bus service from Greeley to Denver along US 85 and laterally to 1-25 via US 34 and then along E-470 to DIA. o There is also a "No Action alternative - existing funding improvements. • Kathleen pointed out both Package A and B have the same improvements shown at the interchanges for basic safety. • Initial cost estimates projected is in 200.5 dollars. All cost estimates will be updated to current year for FEIS. In addition, they will be updating the travel and land use forecasts. o Package A = $2.433 billion o Package B = $2.006 billion o No Action = $57 million • Project schedule for remainder of year o DEIS review o Public hearing o Compile comments o Establish Preferred Alternative — will take several months. o FEIS - Remainder of 2009 o Analysis and address public comment o Develop document o Agency review o Public hearing • Kathleen stated they have received many public comments and much interest in the commuter rail option. Discussion • Alan Apt commented the NRAB does not have enough information for a formal recommendation to Council at this time. However, members of the board can comment as individuals. o Kathleen offered to provide more in-depth information on the components of the EIS and that the NRAB has a year to comment to CDOT. She will return at a later date to get a formal recommendation from the NRAB. 4 • Alan commented that, personally, he preferred adding a rail line. Adding lanes to I-25 would d cause more car traffic and gridlock and is not a sustainable solution to transportation. He also pointed out nothing in the EIS addresses the escalating price of gasoline. • Liz stated she appreciated Council's and staff s comments on the deficiencies in the EIS. In light of our current economic situation, she thought we may be on the cusp of a new way to travel and we need to take a hard look at the issues of growth, land use and how they affect the area between here and Denver. She agreed that continually adding lanes onto I-25 is not sustainable. • In answer to a question from Liz, Kathleen Bracke stated taking mass transit from Fort Collins to DIA is not efficient. She also stated the busses will probably run on alternative fuel. • John Armstrong pointed out staff comments had similar questions as heard tonight and they also identified the need to have this plan be compatible with the Climate Action Plan. • Heather asked if CDOT is addressing wildlife migration corridors. Kathleen stated there were drainage improvements that could be designed to be for wildlife migration, but didn't see that purpose listed. • Phil Friedman asked if anything is said about the feasibility of getting the project to reality. The costs are substantial and the state has huge demands across the entire state for transportation projects. Has anyone figured out which plan has the most likelihood of getting done. Kathleen did not think CDOT has worked on the "probability" aspect. For any of the projects to move forward, CDOT would have to identify funding in the final document. Each phase goes forward as funding is identified. • . Heather pointed out that down the road, maintenance of mass transit would be less expensive than maintaining more highways. • Ethan Billingsley pointed out Environmental Impact Statements mostly deal in quantitative information and' suggested CDOT consider the project's future impacts on related things such as air quality and the impact of more emissions on health. • Kathleen informed the group that Transportation has been discussing the benefit of putting transit where the people are rather than make them go out of their way to get to transit. • Clint stated he preferred the idea of building roads versus bus rapid transit and rail because of the difficulty in training people to effectively use rapid transit. He also suggested CDOT investigate the likelihood and cost for moving freight trains out of Fort Collins and not waste time on.it if it is not feasible. He also wondered,what the shelf life of the plan is. Kathleen pointed out the commuter trains will share the tracks with freight. She also stated if the plan is done in phases, it can be kept alive while they are doing incremental implantation. If nothing is done in 5-10 years it would have to be redone. She feels confident the region will make transportation improvements on a continuing basis and not let the plan lapse. • Kathleen encouraged the group to look at the CDOT website — www.cdot.info/northi25is/ . She also has a hard copy in her office for public review. • John Armstrong asked how the Transportation Board was responding to the North I-25 EIS and if any other boards are actively engaged in this. Kathleen stated her group has contacted all the boards and commissions. She hasn't heard yet from the Transportation Board, but she has had interest from the Downtown Development Authority. • Clint wondered what is the most effective way to make recommendations. Kathleen responded the things that need more analysis need to be shared with CDOT as early as possible. Input on preferred alternatives would probably be within the next five months. • Liz asked how a commuter train rail line could be added downtown and wouldn't it mean more trains going through downtown Fort Collins. Kathleen stated commuters could access the train downtown on Mason. South of Harmony a second track is proposed so freight and commuters would take different tracks. 5 In summary, Kathleen stated each package has many pros and cons and is a difficult choice. She thanked the NRAB for their time and suggested they call her with any questions or input. Bicycle Advisory Committee, NRAB priorities Alan Apt explained that the purpose of this discussion is to consider what Clint might bring to the table on behalf of the NRAB. Clint stated he has not been notified yet when the first meeting will be. • Alan stated that he is concerned about bike safety on Shields and bicyclists riding on the sidewalks. He would like to see priority bike lanes there. Clint commented D.K. Kemp has talked about "bike boulevards" where a street is shut down and it becomes a bike thoroughfare. • Liz projected as bicycle ridership increases, so will the accidents between cars and bikes. She is most concerned with the safety issues of bicyclists not obeying the traffic regulations and also not wearing lights at night. • Clint stressed he will not be relaying the personal opinions of each NRAB member. He felt the input he brings to the Bicycle Advisory Committee from the NRAB should solely be about the impacts of bicycling on natural resources. • John Armstrong suggested the group defers this discussion until it is determined what Council's expectations of the Bicycle Advisory Committee are. He also pointed out the Bike Committee is a sub -committee of the Transportation Board, not a task force. • In summary, Alan Apt stated, as the NRAB's liaison to the Bicycle Advisory Committee, Clint Skutchan will be giving informal updates to the NRAB about their agenda and what is going on. 2008 NRAB Annual Report • John Armstrong pointed out the report is basically an administrative task and, if the previous format is acceptable to the NRAB, it is the chair's responsibility to identify the milestone and action items completed in 2008. o He suggested the report not include hyperlinks to other documents, as they may not always work. o The Annual Report is due January 31, 2009, and does not have to voted on by the group. New Business • Alan Apt mentioned HB 1350 was passed in last year's Colorado legislative session. This bill is to facilitate the financing of renewable energy. o He also pointed out that Boulder County passed an ordinance to provide funding to homeowners via bonds. This money would then be lent to homeowners who want to install solar panels and pay it back over 30 years in property taxes. Alan suggested Fort Collins should consider doing this. Ben Manvel is getting more information. o . John Armstrong stated HB 1350 is a 21-page state -level enabling legislation bill and that he contacted the City's state government liaison, Tess Heffernan. She said there isn't enough information known internally to provide a specific overview of this bill or the local outcome in Boulder County. o Alan Apt stated this law could provide more green jobs in Fort Collins o Guest Ann Hutchinson (Fort Collins Chamber of Commerce) stated two weeks ago when Council was discussing the energy code she heard PRPA announce they were looking at special funds next year for installation of PV, either in grants or loans. C: Council Six Month Planning Calendar • Suggested future items for NRAB to consider o John Armstrong stated he has scheduled Steve Catanach from Utilities to come back in February regarding the code change proposal. This would be an action item for the NRAB. 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 rel Adjourn • John also suggested the members of the board check the 6 month calendar on the City's website the day of their meetings for the latest version since it changes frequently. Water conservation plan Hazardous materials study Sustainability Mason Corridor and Transit Master Plan Gailmarie Kimmel from BuyLocal to talk about what's going on in the community. CSU Maxwell Ranch wind farm project Climate Action Plan review Status of the Excel Energy Craig, Colorado, Coal Fired Plant and environmental impacts Update on NISP Clint Skutchan moved and Heather Manier seconded a motion to adjourn. Alan Apt adjourned the meeting at 8:20 pm. Submitted by Alexis Hmielak Administrative Secretary I Approved by the Board on `l��� % �i 200' Signed A& Adm' istrative Secretary I Date 7