HomeMy WebLinkAboutWater Board - Minutes - 08/19/2010Fort
Collins Utilities
Water
Board
Minutes
Thursday,
August
19,
2010
Water
Board
Chairperson
City
Council
Liaison
Gina
Janett, 493-4677
David
Roy,
217-5506
Water
Board
Vice
Chairperson
Staff
Liaison
Steve
Balderson,
223-7915
Brian
Janonis, 221-6702
Roll
Call
Board
Present
Chairperson
Gina
Janett,
Vice
Chairperson
Steve
Balderson,
Board
Members
Phil
Phelan,
Duncan
Eccleston,
Mike
Connor,
Brian
Brown,
and
David Pillard
Board
Absent Board
Members
Johannes
Gessier, Reagan Waskorn,
and
Ed
Zdenek
spoke
in
agreement
with
remarks
made
by
Mr.
Shannon
and
Mr.
Hendee.
Significant
money
has
been
spent
on
a
property
in
or
near
the
flood fringe,
and
he
seeks
information
whether
their
property
is
included
in
this
possible regulation
change.
They
are
in
current
negotiations
with
the
City related
to
the
North
College
Building
On
Basics
(BOB)
improvement
project.
Bonnie
Szidon,
Board
discussioiz.
How
nzanv
floods
hai’e
occurred
in
the
100-year
floodplain
since
staff
has
tracked
events?
Two
flood
events
took
place
in
the
100-year
floodplain
in
1864
and
1904.
Why
has
Council
requested
this
review?
Water Engineering
and
Field
Services
Manager
Jon
Haukaas
noted
this
review
is
part
of
the
entire
Stormwater
Program
repurposing
effort,
a
large
part
of
which relates
to
What
does
LOMR
mean?
LOMR stands
for
“Letter
Of
Map
Revision”,
a
lengthy,
expensive
FEMA
process
where maps
are
changed.
With
more
restrictive regulations
in
2000,
Council
implemented
a
‘wil1ing
seller/willing
buyer”
option.
How
do the
City’s
floodplain
regulations
compare
to
other
communities?
The
0.5-foot
rise
floodway
is
becoming
the
standard
regulation
around
the
state.
The
City
of
Fort
Collins
has
additional,
stricter regulations
which
not
flooded
in
two
hundred
years,
he
suggests
staff
may
want
to
participate
with
FEMA
to
develop better
mapping
of
the
area,
regardless
of
what
the
Board
recommends.
Board
Member
Pillard
referred
to
the
“willing
buyer/willing
seller” program.
Staff
confirmed
it
is
still
available.
A
set
amount
of
funding
is
not
reserved
for this
type
of
activity,
but
staff
continues
to
be
interested
redevelop,
an
amount
of
unmitigated
stormwater
is
anticipated.
This project would resolve
an
existing
Adequate
Public
Facilities
deficiency.
The purchase
price
is
approximately
$1.4
million.
Every
utility
has
the
right
to
use
reserves
for
loans
on
investments
at
a
higher interest
rate than
it
is
making
at
the
bank
or
hold
in
savings
accounts earning
a
hank
interest
rate.
The Board
is
requested
to
authorize
appropriating
$326,472
as
Chairperson
Janett
met
recently
with
staff
on
the
instream
flow
program.
Instream
flow
benefits
natural
areas
the
most,
so
the
Natural
Resources
department
is
the
natural
lead
on
this topic.
She
would
like
the
committee
to
meet one more
time
to
prepare
a
full
recommendation
to
the
Water
Board.
Committee
Reports
Engineering
Conunittee
(Vice
Chairperson Balderson):
No
report.
Water
Conseui’ation
Committee
(Board
Member
Phelan):
No
report.
Legislative,
Finance
and
Legal
Committee
(Board
Member
Pillard):
No
report.
Instreamn
Flow
Committee
(Vacant):
No
report.
Water Supply Committee
(Board
Member
Gessler):
No
report.
Other
Business
None
Adjournment
The
meeting
was
adjourned
at
5:
11
p.m.
Submitted
by
Robin
Pierce,
Executive
Administrative
Assistant
Fort
Collins Utilities
Approved
by the
Board
on
/
,
2010
Signed:
/0/i//Jo
Board
Secretary
Date
Water
Board
Minutes
7
August
19,
2010
a
10-year
loan
to
the
URA
on
an
interest-payments-only
basis
with
the
principal
due
at
the
end
of
the
loan
or paid
at
points
in
the
life
of
the
loan
without penalty
for
early
pre
payment.
The
principal
would
remain
available
upon
request
if
needed
and
accessible
within
two
weeks
of
request.
The
seller
is
providing
some
of
the
land
and
using
the
land for
his
own
retention
and
detention
storrnwater
until
he
can
make
use
of
the
outfall
structure.
[)oes
this
project
handle
all
fiture
dei’elopinent
or
will
other
parties
still
have
to
build their
own
ponds?
It
anticipates
a
certain
level
of
future
development.
Motion:
Board
Member
Brown
moved
that
the
Water
Board
recommends
that
City
Council
appropriate
$326,472
for
the
purpose
of
making
the
loan
from
the
Stormwater
reserves
to
the
Urban
Renewal
Authority
for
a
term
of
10
years
interest
only.
Board
Member Phelan
seconded.
Vote
on
the
motion:
It
passed
unanimously
2011-2012
Budget Update
Utilities
Executive Director
Brian
Janonis encouraged
Board members
to
attend
a
special
budget
session
for
hoards
and
commissions
on
September
1
3
at
6:30
p.m.
at
the
Drake
Center.
The
budget
is
not
completed,
and
staff
will
seek
recommendation
from
the
Board
at
the
September
meeting.
Press
Release
Water
Resources
Manager
Dennis
Bode
addressed
a
July
27
“Cash
for
Grass”
press
release
sent
out
recently
by
the
Save
The
Poudre group
about
the
concept
of
incentivizing
citizens
to
convert
from
irrigated
grass
to
xeriscape landscaping.
It
made some
comparisons
to
the
cost
of storage
between
such
a
conversion
compared
to
the cost
of enlarging
Halligan
Reservoir.
Mr.
Bode
provided
information
to
the
Board
comparing
dollars
per
acre
foot
realized
by
converting
to
xeriscaping
($43,560)
versus
the
cost
of
enlarging
Halligan
($4,600).
Also,
Gary
Wockner
made
a
comment
to
Council
Tuesday
night
about
the
City
of
Fort
Collins
being
the
top
diverter of
water
from
the
Poudre
River.
A
list
of
the
top
ten
diverters
was
shared
with
the
Board.
Committee
Meetings
At
the
recent
Engineering
Committee
meeting,
rnemhers were
asked
to
pilot
use
of
the
Triple
Bottom
Line
Analysis
(TBLAM)
form
for
the
Siorrnwaier
program.
Water
Board
Minutes
6
August
19,
2010
in
participating
in
it
as
the
level
of
reserves
permits.
Vice
Chairperson
Balderson
noted
his
concern
that
we
are
seeking
to
change
the
regulations
yet
again
when
the
Board
had
compelling
reasons
to
vote
for
the
change
from
0.1-foot
rise
floodway
to
0.5-foot
rise
floodway
in
2007.
Board
Member
Phelan
agreed
with
Vice
Chairperson Balderson’s
concern.
Board
Member
Eccleston
noted
this
is
the
chance
for
the
Board
to
follow through
on
what
staff
was
asked
to
do,
but
he
also
sees
this
as
a
much
bigger
picture.
He
encourages
Council
to
pull
in
resources
from
other
departments
who
could
further
analyze
some
aspects
of
this
decision.
Board
Member
Brown
feels
it
is
risky
and
the
public
all
incurs
costs
from
putting structures
in
the
floodplain.
There
are
other
pieces
of
the
Triple Bottom
Line
to
weigh
in
on.
Chairperson
Janett
will
support
the
motion,
noting
her
understanding
that
it’s
a
cost
to
someone
who wants
to
make
the
most
economic
use
of
their
property.
When
agreeing
to
allow
fill
in
the
floodplain,
the
water
goes
somewhere
else,
and
a
neighbor
who
is
impacted
is
not
compensated
for
the
damages.
It
also
impacts
infrastructure
such
as
bridges
and
streets,
the
community’s
ability
to
travel,
and
safety
response
by
fire
and
police.
It’s
a
balancing
act for
how
best
to
protect
aspects
such
as
life
safety
and
infrastructure.
Vote
on
the
motion
by
roll
call:
Pillard-
Aye
Con
nor
—
Aye
Eccleston
—
Aye
Phelan
—
Nay
Balderson
—
Nay
Janett
—
Aye
Brown
—
Aye
Motion
passes
with
5
for,
2
against.
(The
reasons
for nay
votes
by Vice
Chairperson Balderson
and
Board
Member
Phelan
are
noted
above).
Board
Member
Pillard
left
the
meeting
at
4:34
p.m.
Northeast
College
Corridor
Outfall
(NECCO)
Project
Financing
Economic
Advisor
Josh Birks
presented
this
agenda
item.
Mr.
Haukaas
noted
this
project
is
part
of
the
Stormwater
Master
Plan
for
the
Stormwater
utility,
who
is
funding
a
part
of
the
project
with
the
Urban
Renewal
Authority
(URA)
funding
the
other
portion.
The
purpose
of
the
project
is
to
provide
a
unified
regional
stormwater
and
water
quality
system
on
the
east
side
of
College
Avenue
north
of
the
Poudre
River.
As
the
area
east
of
College
continues
to
develop
and
Water
Board Minutes
5
August
19,
2010
inciLide
critical
facilities
regulations
and
a
higher
freeboard
requirement.
Staff
is
researching regulations
around
the
coLintry
and
developing
an
informational
matrix
to
share
with
Council.
How
do
these
options
compare
to
FEMA
‘s
recommended
approach
(rather
thami
comparing
to
their
minimum)? FEMA
does
not
have
a
recommendation,
hut
encourages communities
to
go
above
and
beyond
their
minimums. However,
the
Association
of
State
Floodplain
Managers
(ASFPM)
is
studying
the
concept
of
“no
adverse impact”,
essentially
“do
no
harm
to
your
neighbor”.
Are
there
any
numbers relative
to
property
owner-to-property
owner
economic
impact
that
occurred
between
2000
and
2007?
Staff
does
not
have
this
data.
Chairperson
Janett
noted
the
charge
of
this
Board
is
to
minimize
impact
to
the
community.
Economic
impact
is
part
of
the
Triple Bottom
Line
filter
of
weighing
social,
economic,
and
environmental
factors.
Quantifying
economic
impact
on
existing landowners
would
be
nearly
impossible.
Staff
noted
the
floodplain
does
not
remain
the
same
due
to
updates
to
mapping
and
changes
iriade
to
the
area
as
part
of
development.
Motion:
Board
Member
Connor
moved
that
the
Water
Board
supports
the
staff
recommendation
to
not
allow
new
structures
in
the
Poudre
River
100-year
floodplain.
Board Member
Pillard
seconded
the
motion.
Board
Member Eccleston requested
a
friendly
amendment
to
use the
exact
motion language
provided
in
the
staff
presentation.
Amended
Motion:
Board
Member
Connor
moved
that
the
Water
Board supports
the
staff
recommendation
to
not
allow
new
structures
in
the
Poudre
River
100-year
floodplain
(Option
2)
and
recommends
to
City
Council
that
staff
continue
with
public
outreach
concerning
changing
Chapter
10
of
City Code
for
total
restriction
of
structures
in
the
Poudre
River
floodplain.
Board
Member
Pillard
seconded
the motion.
Discussion
on
the
motion:
Board
Member
Brown
would
like
staff
to
represent
both sides
of
the
issue
as
this
goes
forward.
There
are
obvious
impacts
to
individual
owners,
hut
also
trade-offs
with
costs
to
the
public
brought
by
development
in
the
floodplain.
Also,
if
the
barn
on
the
Link-N-Greens
property
has
Water
Board
Minutes
4
August
19,
2010
floodplain
protection. The
Water
Board
also
requested information
from
staff
in
2009
related
to
a
change
to
allow
no
structures
in
the
floodplain.
If
structures
are
allowed
in
the
floodplain,
there
are
requirements
to
raise
the
structure,
and
as
a
consequence,
it
changes
the
nature
of
the
floodplain
itself; with
potential
unpact
of
flood
damage
to
other
structures.
This
is
correct.
A
change
to
the
regulations
occurred
in
2000.
Wh\’
was
it
changed again
in
2007?
In
2000,
after
the
1997
Spring
Creek
flood,
Poudre
River regulations
were
changed
to
adopt
a
0.1-ft
floodway
restriction,
a
higher freeboard
requirement
(18
inch
to
2
foot)
and
a
restriction
for
no
new
residential structures
in
the
floodplain.
Then
in
2007,
City
staff
was
given
direction
to
align
the
City’s
and
County’s
regulations
more
closely
to
ease
complexities
with
cases
like
annexations.
The
County
became
more
restrictive
and
the
City became
less
restrictive
in
order
to
align
the
regulations,
and
the
City
changed
from
the
0.
I-foot
rise
floodway
to
the
0.5-foot
rise
floodway. If
the
City
returns
to
the
0.1-foot
rise
floodway,
our
regulations
will
once
again
be
different
from
the
County.
Their
staff
is
aware
of
this
possibility,
and
their
commissioners
anticipate staying
with
their
current
regulations.
Is
more
liz-depth
economic
analysis
planned?
Each
property
will
be
different; therefore,
it’s
difficult
to
do
a
full
economic
analysis.
Staff
would
be
able
to
analyze
existing structures
requesting
additions,
for
example.
It’s
very
speculative
to
consider
potential
developments.
Staff
recognizes
there
are
a
lot
of
other
issues
and
varying
perspectives.
Economic
impact
must
be
evaluated
both for
lost
development
opportunities
as
well
as
the
cost
impact
to
the
City
for
managing
a
flood
event.
There
are
economics
to
carefully
consider
on
both sides
of
the
issue.
Staff
has
talked
with
the
following
groups:
Land
Conservation
and
Stewardship
Board
Planning
and
Zoning
Board
Planning
staff
at
the
City
of
Fort
Collins
Friends
of
the
Poudre
Individual
property
owners
They
are
in
the
process
of
setting
up
meetings
with
other relevant
boards
and
entities,
e.g.
Downtown Development
Authority.
Would
a
i’ariaizce
process
still
be
in
place?
Yes,
staff
and
Water
Board
would
follow
the
same
criteria
for
variances.
Is
flood insurance
required
for
businesses
that
want
to
develop
in
the
flood
fringe?
It
is
required
if
they have
any
kind
of
loan
backed
by
federal
funds.
Water
Board
Minutes
3
August
19,
2010
Ranchway
Feeds, concurs
with
remarks
made
by
Mr.
Shannon
and
Mr.
Hendee.
Heather Hoffman
Wolhart
spoke
about
the
personal
aspect
of
this
issue.
The
Link-N-Greens
property
is
their family estate.
Their
family
has
been
part
of
the
community
for
I
6()
years
and
recognizes
it’s
not
viable
to
continue
to
hold
the
property
as
part
of
their family heritage.
It
needs
to
be
developed
for
the
benefit
of
the
community.
Jim
Hoffman added
his
great
grandfather
came
to
Fort
Collins
in
1861
and built
barns
and
a
home
in
the
Link-N-Greens
location. Two
major
floods
in
1864
and
1904
have
not
impacted
the
property,
SO
he
doesn’t
feel
there
is
a
sense
of
urgency
to
change
the
floodplain.
Philip
Hoffman supports
the
floodplain
limit
left
as
it
is
currently.
Minutes
of
July
15,
2010,
Meeting
Board
Member Connor
moved
to
approve
the
minutes
from
the
July
15,
2010,
meeting.
Board
Member
Eccleston
seconded
the
motion,
and
it
passed
unanimously
with
Board
Members
Brown
and
Phelan
abstaining
from
the
vote
since
they
did
not
attend
the
July meeting.
Floodplain
Regulations
Based
on
previous direction
given
by
this
Board
to
staff
at
the
November
18,
2009,
meeting,
City
floodplain
staff
has
researched
the
issues
surrounding
a
potential change
to
the
City
floodplain
regulations.
Floodplain Manager
Marsha
Hilmes-Robinson
presented
three
options
for
the
Board’s
consideration:
Option
1.
Adopting
0.1-ft
rise
floodway
from
the
current
0.5-ft
rise
floodway;
or
Option
2.
No new
structures
and
additions
are
allowed
in
the
100-year
floodplain;
or
Option
3.
Keep
current
regulations
with
no
change
to
boundaries.
Staff
continues
to
work
through
the
data
to
determine
the
percentage
of
parcels
that
would
he
impacted
by
a
total
restriction
of
structures
in
the 100-year
floodplain
(Option
2).
Staff
recommends
Option
2,
a
total
restriction
of
new
structures
and
additions
to
existing
structures
within
the
100-year
floodplain
for
the
following
reasons. This
change
puts
fewer
people
at
risk
and
minimizes
property
damage,
and
natural
and
beneficial
functions
of
the
river
will
also
be
preserved.
Property rights
issues
are
also
involved
with
this
decision. Property
owners
not
currently
in
the
floodplain could
be
impacted
with
wet
property
as
a
result
ol
fill
and
development,
which
changes
the
floodplain.
Different
sets
of
regulations
govern
the
floodway
and
the
flood
fringe.
Chairperson
Janett
noted
the
process involved
with
considering
a
change
to
the
floodplain
regulations, including additional
opportunities
for
public
comment.
Water
Board
Minutes
August
19,
2010
Eileen
Dornfest
Staff
Present
Brian
Janonis,
Jon
Haukaas,
Marsha
Hilmes-Robinson,
Ken
Sampley,
Susan
Hayes,
Brian
Varrella,
KymBerlie
Cosner, Dennis
Bode,
Diana
Royval, Josh
Birks
and
Robin
Pierce
Guests
David
Hoffman,
Heather Woihart,
Cindi
Hamar,
Paul
Syverson, Bruce Hendee,
Philip
Hoffman, James Hoffman,
Ruth
Hoffman,
Jeffrey
Wolff,
Michael Bello,
Ann
Hutchison,
Dale
Rushneck,
Michelle Jacobs,
Kim
Szidon,
Bonnie Szidon,
Ed
Zdenek
and
Rich
Shannon
Meeting Convened
Chairperson
Janett
called
the
meeting
to
order
at
3:05
p.m.
Public
Comment
Chairperson
Janett
opened
Public
Comment
by
referring
to
the
Water
Board’s
advisory
role
to
Council. Council
may
choose
to
heed
the
recommendations
of
the
Board
or
not
on
decisions
before
them.
Rich
Shannon,
Pinnacle
Consulting
Group,
expressed
appreciation
for
the
high
standards already
in
place
with
the
City’s
stormwater
program
and
noted
the
role
of
the
group
to
lay
out
these
potentially significant
changes
clearly
for
the
public,
e.g.
data,
consequences,
etc.
He
asked
the
Board
to
give
careful
consideration
to
making
a
change
which
will
impact
long-time families!
landowners
and
their
livelihoods
based
on
mitigating
risk
for
a
1
percent
chance
event.
Mr.
Shannon asked
why
staff
is
not
focusing
on
the
other floodplain
basins
with
this
potential
change.
Bruce Hendee
spoke
on
behalf
of
Allen
Ginsborg,
a
potential
developer
of
the
land
grant
property
of
Link-N-Greens
golf course.
This legacy
property
represents
one
of
the
last infill
development
opportunities
in
Fort
Collins. If
the most
severe
restrictions
are
passed,
it
would
reduce
a
100+
acre
property
down
to
35
acres
available
for
development.
He
and
Mr.
Ginsborg
are
confident
they
can work
with
the
City
to
improve many
other pertinent qualities
of
the
area.
Water
Board
Minutes
August
19,
2010