Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutNatural Resources Advisory Board - Minutes - 04/15/2009NATURAL RESOURCES ADVISORY BOARD MINUTES Regular Meeting April 15, 2009 DATE: Wednesday, April 15, 2009 LOCATION: 215 N. Mason - Conference Room 1-A TIME: 6:OOpm For Reference:. Liz Pruessner, NRAB Chair 221-9875 Ben Manvel, Council Liaison 217-1932 John Armstrong, Staff Liaison 416-2230 Board Members Present: Liz Pruessner, Joe Piesman, Ethan Billingsly, Heather Manier, Glen Colton, Phil Friedman, Alan Apt. Board Members Absent: Clint Skutchan Staff Present: Natural Resources Department: Alexis Hmielak, John Armstrong, Lucinda Smith Cali meeting to order — Liz Pruessner called the meeting to order at 6:02 pm. Introduction of Guests — Citizens Bob Mann and Eric Sutherland, CSU students Sam Martin, Bri Bienenan, Andrew Romanyshyn, Natalie Vogel and Jessica Cronin Agenda Review — none Public Comments: none Climate Action Plan Addendum Senior Environmental Planner Lucinda Smith addressed the board with an update on the Climate Action Plan Addendum. • Recap of what the addendum is about: .o In December, 2008, City Council adopted the 2008 Climate Action Plan. Lucinda noted that, even though this plan is the framework for City's 2020 carbon reduction goal, it did not have enough strategies in it to meet the 2020 goal and the shorter term 2012 reduction goals. o In December, 2008, Council also considered an addendum to the Climate Action Plan containing additional strategies to help achieve the goals. These additional strategies were mainly the acquisition of carbon offsets. City Council saw this as a negative for the City because it would be taking money out of our community. Therefore, Council asked staff to develop with a new addendum that would fill up the gaps without using carbon offsets and renewable'energy credits. As a result, Lucinda has been working with staff across the city and with the Energy Management Team to develop this new addendum. o After the new addendum is developed and input is gathered from various advisory boards, it will go back to City Council in June, 2009. Lucinda stated it has been challenging to come up with short term strategies to reduce emissions in 2012 that aren't already covered in the Climate Action Plan. • Lucinda presented a table showing the size of the gap of COZ reductions for which the addendum needs to provide strategies. o 100,000 to 200,000 tons CO2e reduction in 2012 and a little over 160,000 tons in 2020. 1 • Ideas currently under consideration for the Addendum: • Waste Reduction: o Construction and demolition debris deposit strategy — includes a refundable fee to the City and a drop off site to help companies recycle their construction debris. ■ Was in the original addendum to meet 50% reduction and fits well with some of the strategies already in the Climate Action Plan. o Integrated waste optimization/Recovery Goal ■ This is a long-term goal of finding a way to use the energy that is in the waste stream that is currently going into landfill. There are some demonstration projects going on around the country to convert this energy using non -combustion processes. Colorado State University is also looking at doing research on some of these technologies. ■ In answer to a question from Joe Piesman who asked if this is like getting methane from landfill, Lucinda stated no, this would be different. It is taking items from the waste stream and doing something different with them. • The Larimer County land fill is already discussing how to tap this gas to power some facilities at CSU. Even though this is in the Climate Action Plan, the carbon savings from recovering methane does not amount to much. • Energy o Additional Benefit from the 2009 Energy Policy o Full FortZED • Transportation. o Incentives for low emissions vehicles o Anticipated changes in vehicle fuel economy • Green Building Practices o Green building code - new measures o Green building — voluntary high performance measures o Bold Initiatives — architecture 2030 -objective is carbon neutral buildings by 2030 • Next Steps o Getting advisory board broad feedback on the strategies being considered for the revised CAP addendum o Working with Brendle Group to update greenhouse gas accounting procedure to ensure compatibility with emerging standards and other local reporting initiatives. o Once decisions about updates to accounting protocols have been made, staff will harmonize the climate Plan reporting and proposed Addendum for presentation to Council, possibly by the end of June, 2009. Discussion: • Alan Apt asked what would actual costs of the construction and demolition debris deposit program be and thought it might be passed along to the public by developers. Lucinda stated the deposit would be refunded if builders recycled their construction debris. John Armstrong stated there is a small oversight cost, but in other cities, this deposit is usually returned. Liz pointed out there are costs already connected with disposing of this waste. • Lucinda stated the estimated costs for this strategy were modeled to be approximately $9,000/year to the City for administration fees and $282,000/year to the community, estimated on other plans around the country. Alan suggested there needs to be more specific answers to these questions to help sell the program. 2 • Liz pointed out when carbon trading or carbon tax gets common, businesses will want to get in on that, but the City will be taking credit for that carbon, not the business. Lucinda stated it depends on what the actual program is and who is initiating and paying for it and it might be possible for the businesses that'are actually doing it could take credit for it. • Heather stated there should not be an exclusion for smaller construction/fix-up projects. Lucinda is not sure they can change the hypothetical modeling right now. It might be difficult for small companies to comply and would increase the administrative burden to track these smaller companies and might not be cost effective. John Armstrong pointed out construction is down some construction firms are shifting to deconstruction. • Phil suggested looking at ways to classify projects so they aren't exempted, but be sure the large waste generators are included. • In answer to a question from Joe, Steve Catanach said he thinks there stimulus money available for the state for smart grid technology and the rules will be published soon. • Alan thought the county has received money for energy efficiency — Steve stated the city received $1.3 million on a project -by -project basis. There is also $90 million available over a 2 year period to the state for low income weatherization. Again, the rules haven't been published yet. The challenge is infrastructure to implement this program. Hopefully, it will increasejobs. • Glen wanted to know if this money can go elsewhere in the community than FortZED. Steve stated there is no border to renewable energy they are trying to develop. Utilities are advocating the City fund as high as it can for renewables and purchasing RECs. • Steve pointed out that he is very proud that Fort Collins if the first municipal utility in the world to be certified by Global Reporting Initiative (GRI) which measures the sustainability actions of a munigipality. There is a link off the City's Utilities website that describes it. There is also a link to Public Power magazine talking about utilities in the 21 sc century that highlights Fort Collins Utilities • To answer a question from Alan, Lucinda stated the City favors converting to hybrid vehicles, but often price and availability is an issue. This fits into the strategy to reduce petroleum consumption. Steve stated Utilities bought a hybrid bucket truck. • To answer Heather, Lucinda stated CSU has made a commitment to become carbon neutral and this goal is a large part of the Climate Action Plan. CSU is doing a lot in the area of renewable energy. She did not know the guidelines for new buildings but Steve Catanach stated new buildings would be LEED Gold standard. • To answer Phil Friedman who asked how valid will these numbers be down the road, Lucinda stated it is difficult to see how things will unfold, but we need to deal responsibly and transparently with changing protocols to handle future revisions. • Liz pointed out the sooner we get started the sooner we can reap benefits • Joe would like to see a priority list of big ticket items the City needs to first. - Transit Strategic Plan Kurt Ravenschlag and Nicole Hahn from Transfort were present to update the Board on the Transit Strategic Plan (TSP), including recommendations from the funding committee. To summarize: • The Transit Strategic Plan (TSP) is a partnership between Fort Collins, Loveland and the Poudre School District. • The purpose of the plan is to: o Update the 2002 Transfort Strategic Operating Plan o Address specific City Policies and Objectives o Foster a Dialogue With the Community and Region o Review Existing Service and Performance Standards 3 o Examine the Existing Four Phased Approach to a Grid Transit Network o Address the Financial Solutions Required. • Project goals and objectives , o Goal 1: Develop an expanded transit system focused on productivity and performance to serve the Fort Collins area.that meets City Plan Policies. They will focus on the high schools to see if Transfort can be an option for them. o Goal 2: Meet and exceed the 2008 Climate Action Plan Goal for Transportation COz reductions by 2020. o Goal 3: Provide enhanced mobility for seniors, youth, disabled and transit dependant. o Goal 4: Develop a public transportation system that reduces roadway related costs for maintenance, right-of-way acquisition, and construction. o Goal 5: Provide funding recommendation to fully implement the Transit Strategic Plan. o 'Goal 6: Stimulate the local economy through investment in public transportation infrastructure and operations. • The process is to: o Collect input from the community. They will have seven open house meetings in Fort Collins and Loveland; four PSD open houses and 30 stakeholder briefings/interviews. o Examine existing Strategic Plan goals and objectives o Examine Existing conditions o Develop system build -out to meet project goals o Financial planning • Most frequent comments from public outreach o Increase hours of service (evenings and weekends) o Increase frequency to a minimum of every half hour o Need to implement a Grid System o Establish regional connections between Fort Collins and Denver Metro o More transit coverage throughout community and region • Draft Build-outphases o Phase 1 - Modest service growth. o Phase 2 - Transition to grid network and regional service o Phase 3 - Full grid network and additional regional service • Costs o The annual operating and maintenance costs for phase III for. Fort Collins is predicted to cost about $22 million; $10 million for Loveland and $5 million for regional service. They anticipate shortfalls for each o They also anticipate a $13 million capital shortfall to implement the plan for Fort Collins; $5.7 million for Loveland and $6.6 million for regional. They are pursuing grants. o Operating expenses to implement the plan in Fort Collins are: ■ Existing: $8 million — 72,000 service hours and 23 busses ■ Phase I: $11,773,084 — 96,100 service hours and 27 busses ■ Phase 11: $18,012,894— 141,000 service hours and 38 busses ■ Phase III: $22,551,179 — 162,800 service hours and 41 busses • Financial Planning o Developed Financial Plans for each Expanded Service Phase o Citizen Financial Advisory Committee convened bi-weekly for 6 months to develop a funding recommendation for the expanded service for Loveland and Fort Collins. Their recommendations were: 11 ■ Immediate Creation of a Regional Service Authority ■ Increase Funding For Phase III Implementation with the Following Sources. - Maintenance of Effort; Fares; General Sales Tax; Transit Utility Fee; Negotiated Agreements and Special Improvement Districts • Why a centralized service provider o Meets Partners Objectives ■ Most direct and effective means of achieving coordinated transit service ■ A service provider avoids confusion with other regional transportation infrastructure efforts. • Each entity provides its own funding and contracts with the service provider for transit service at whatever level it wishes • Can be designed `so that additional jurisdictions could join now or later. o Governance ■ Simplifies administration and improves accountability ■ Strengthens regional partnerships ■ Better leverages State and Federal funding. o Operational Efficiencies and Economies of Scale ■ Shared overhead costs, staffing, and facilities. o Long Term Opportunities ■ Fully achieving long range visions for Northern Colorado mobility requires the formation of one regional transit provider. • Staff Recommendation o Staff recommends that a Regional Service Authority Feasibility Study be completed by January 2010 as an addendum to the Transit Strategic Plan with the following scope of work: Background Analysis; Stakeholder Interviews; Peer Analysis; Alternatives and Cost/Benefit Analysis • Benefits — based on ridership projections o Reduced dependency"on oil o Reduction in CO2 and o Transit reduction in VMT and CO2 o Relieves congestion o Benefits to seniors and low income individuals o Builds strong economy and saves money by having one less car/family o. Increased real estate values and development o Reduces investment required for expansion of streets • Summary — demand will increase in next few years — need to prepare now o Economics — increase in oil increases commodities and cost of living o Aging population o Environmental concerns • Next steps o April - June: Meet with City Boards and Commissions o April 28th: City Council Work Session o May - June: Documentation o July 7: Council Regular Session for Adoption Discussion: • Alan stated a sales tax and utility fee will get negative reactions for double taxing. • Joe suggested Transfort have smaller, more efficient busses. Kurt pointed out they need larger buses for peak load, and purchasing smaller buses would double operating costs. The new buses are fuel efficient and clean. G • Glen Colton pointed out Transfort has to readdress the fees. • Kurt will come back to the NRAB in June for action. Electric Service Code Changes The Natural Resources Board reviewed, discussed and finalized a memo to Council regarding the Electric Service Code changes drafted by Phil Friedman. Steve Catanach (Fort Collins Utilities Light and Power Manager) was present to answer questions. Discussion: • Phil Friedman stressed that the City needs to be sure it is in a 2-way situation between community and the utility. Also, Council should be involved with any type of regulatory changes that promote renewables, efficiency or conservation. He felt we should be flexible to address things as they change. o Phil also stated the real cost of distribution of small PV systems without rebates is about 40 cents per kWh which is significantly higher than what we currently pay. Germany, Spain and Italy have moved forward on PV and are willing to pay the real cost for that type of electric generation. • Glen asked for clarification regarding limiting sales of PV generating systems to 1 OkW for residential and 25kW for commercial. Steve answered that the 25kW limit for commercial PV generation has been increased to 1 megawatt with an agreement between the generator and the customer. For over 1 megawatt generation, Platte River Power Authority requires a contract because that amount of electricity needs to be scheduled by PRPA and creates a risk their bond council requires be protected. • Glen also asked how this compares to what Excel Energy is doing. Steve stated Excel is a different model. There is a Senate bill pending that is, in essence, establishing the same type of structure that we are offering third parties where developers can sell to customers. There will still be financial ties to the utilities. • Steve pointed out the NRAB isn't being asked to move on the ordinance but the follow- through -structure. • In answer to a question by Phil who asked if residential generation was greater than 1 OkW, would they have to have a contract with the utility, Steve stated he was unclear what arrangement would be necessary, but did say Fort Collins Utilities would not stand in their way to generate that much electricity. Their goal is to incentify PV. • Glen asked Steve Catanach what resources Fort Collins has used to develop its supply policy such as experts, utilities or large providers who have been doing this for several years. His intent is for Fort Collins to be sure it is leading -edge on this. Steve responded it is Fort Collins Utilities' intent to have a model facility built around sustainability. Utilities have historically been very conservative, however, the electric utility industry is currently experiencing a great deal of change and is moving forward towards green energy. • Glen stated Fort Collins needs to have a discussion with its citizens whether or not the city . wants to be green or not and if the citizens are willing to pay for being green. Steve pointed out community dialogue is part of the plan. • Liz Pruessner stated the Climate Action Plan addresses the greater costs to achieve its goals. • Steve pointed out utilities is organizing a stakeholder community forum to educate the public about the future of utilities around the world. Alan Apt moved to send the following finalized memorandum to Fort Collins City Council. Joe Piesman seconded. Motion passed with 7 members voting yes and one member who left the meeting early not voting. 0 The Natural Resources AdvisoryBoard coiisidered the proposed changes to the City Electric Service Code at meetings in December 2008, March and April 2009. NRAB unanimously supports the proposed changes and urges the City to make every effort possible to provide incentives that promote residential and commercial solar installations. Specific recommendations regarding Net Metering. • Customers should be reimbursed for their annual excess generation at their current retail energy rate. • The net metering maximum system size should be I megawatt Specific recommendations regarding the proposed electric service Code change: • Remove language in Code requiring recovery of all costs, both direct and indirect, to the City and Platte River and instead address each potential cost specifically in the code. Address specific concerns about insurance and infrastructure in the interconnection requirements. Payment in lieu of taxes shall be permitted on third party retail sales. Board recommendations pertinent to both topics: • The net metering rate and Code should have a requirement for re-evaluation every 3 years or sooner, as changes in patterns of electricity usage, pricing, etc. arise. • The city should codify net metering policies as soon as possible per House Bill 08- 1160. Such requirements were legislated by the General Assembly lastyear. • An ongoing dialogue among city council, the city utility, and the community about the regulatory model for distributed energy (all forms) in Fort Collins should take place. • Customers installing generation would be required to obtain appropriate insurance for their systems. This requirement should be described in the Utility Interconnection Requirements. • If a customer's installation requires an upgrade to the utility electrical infrastructure, the City will cover the cost of residential upgrades necessary to support residential installations. • For commercial customers, typically larger systems over 10 kilowatts, the utility should create a process to offset a certain percentage of these upgrade costs that are charged to the customer so the customer would not be responsible for the entire cost of transformer upgrades and/or other necessary infrastructure upgrades. NRAB is concerned that bearing the entire cost might be a disincentive for commercial customers to invest in solar systems. Review and Approval of Minutes: March 18, 2008 Glen Colton had a minor change on page 4 to substitute Excel Energy for Colorado Springs Utility. Joe Piesman moved and Alan Apt seconded a motion to adopt the March 18, 2008, minutes as amended. Motion passed unanimously New Business John Armstrong stated the trash services issue is going to City Council on May 5 with no additional public outreach scheduled. He gave the NRAB a quick update on the status of the proj ect. ` o Ann Tumquist presented to the NRAB in January. Staff is working ordinance language and well as putting together a rough framework around a pilot district. o What goes before council on May 5 will be: ■ Ordinance enhancements such eliminating the base rate and making it volume based — more of a pure "pay as you throw" formula. • ■ Having haulers offer larger recycling containers for single stream recycling. ■ Establish a formal recycling education program with the haulers. ■ Increase licensing fees. ■ A cardboard ban has been taken off the agenda for residential. Commercial is not being addressed here, however it is addressed in the Climate Action Plan. ■ Establishing additional reporting requirements for residential haulers — including the volumes and weights of trash being reported to the City. ■ Staff has put together a rough outline of how a pilot trash district might look. ■ Requiring haulers to offer yard waste service was removed, however, it may appear in the pilot trash district The NRAB decided to weigh in on this issue and crafted the following memo to City Council. Alan Apt moved and Glen Colton seconded a motion to send the following memo to City Council regarding trash services. Motion passed unanimously The NRAB voted unanimously to strongly support changes to City Code resulting from the Trash Services proposal and we offer the following two recommendations: • NRAB urges the City to require haulers to offer yard waste collection service. • NRAB feels it is very important to ban disposal of'corrugated cardboard from the waste stream, particularly from the commercial /industrial sector. The meeting was adjourned at 10:00 pm Submitted by Alexis Hmielak Administrative Secretary I Approved by the Board on , 2008 r Signed Administrative Secretar" y Date