HomeMy WebLinkAboutWater Board - Minutes - 03/17/2011Fort Collins Utilities Water Board Minutes
Thursday, March 17, 2011
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
Brian Brown, Becky Goldbach, Phil Phelan, Duncan Eccieston, Reagan Waskom, Johannes
Gessler, Steve Malers, Brett Bovee, and Lori Brunswig
Board Absent
Staff Present Brian Janonis, Jon Haukaas, Robin Pierce, Harriet Davis, Katy Bigner, Owen
Randall, Dean Saye, Dennis Bode, Matt Fater, Patty Bigner, Jenny Lopez-Filkins, Susan
Smolnik, Carol Webb, Lisa Voytko, and John Stokes
Guests George Wallace, Richard Seaworth, and George Reed
Meeting Convened
Chairperson Janett called the meeting to order at 5:30 p.m. She encouraged participants to view
segments of the series, The Poudre River Runs Through It — Northern Colorado’s Water Future.
These can be viewed on Channel 14, and streaming video is also available at the City Clerk’s
website http://www.fcgov.com/cityclerk.
The February 24 segment on February 24 was very informative and discussed topics such as
water rights and ditches. The next meeting is March 24 at the Larimer County Courthouse. The
video portion begins at 5:30pm. At the viewing, you also have the opportunity to win a
publication called Colorado Water Law.
Public Comment
None
Minutes of February 17, 2011, Meeting
Vice Chairperson Balderson moved to approve the minutes from the February 17, 2011, meeting.
Board Member Gessler seconded the motion, and it passed unanimously.
Cache la Poudre Wildfire Watershed Assessment
(Presentation available upon request)
Water Production Manager Lisa Voytko introduced the guest speaker, Brad Piehi, partner with
JW Associates, Inc. who has participated in several watershed wildfire assessments including the
Cache Ia Poudre Wildfire Watershed Assessment, a project funded jointly by the Cities of Fort
Water Board Minutes 1
March 17, 2011
Collins and Greeley and a number of stakeholders (Tn-Districts, Northern Colorado Water
Conservancy District, Larimer County, Colorado State Forest Service, U.S. Forest Service, and
Natural Resources Conservation Service). A Front Range Wildfire Watershed Protection Work
GroLip was formed to develop and implement a strategy to protect critical Front Range
watersheds from high-severity wildfires and included ten participants, such as Denver Water,
Aurora Water, Colorado Springs Utilities, the US and Colorado State Forest Services, the US
Geological Service (USGS), and the Colorado Department of Public Health and Environment
(refer to the presentation for a listing of all ten participants). The group produced a technical
document to identify watersheds critical to water supply, assess adverse effects of post-wildfire
hydrologic changes, and prioritize sixthleveI* watersheds. A number of stakeholders are also
involved in this process. The USGS identifies the watershed level; a larger number translates to
a smaller watershed.
*Definition of a sixth-level watershed classification:
Hydrologic Unit: Watersheds in the United States and the Caribbean were
delineated by the U.S. Geological Survey using a national standard hierarchical
system based on surface hydrologic features and are classified into four types of
hydrologic units: first-field (region), second-field (sub-region), third-field
(accounting unit), and fourth-field (cataloguing unit). A fifth-field of classification
(watershed) and sixth-field (sub-watershed) are currently under development.
http://www.nrcs.usda.gov/programs/rwalWatershed HU HUC WatershedApproach defined 6-
1 8-07.pdf
The first-level watershed for the Poudre River is the Mississippi River, and the second-level
watershed is the Missouri River, for example. The Cache la Poudre Watershed is comprised of
648,000 acres and 33 sixth-level watersheds, and includes the areas of Fort Collins, Red Feather
Lakes, and the state line. These watersheds are studied for features such as soil erodibility and
debris flow hazard. Mr. Piehl reviewed the watershed’s Wildfire Hazard, Flooding/Debris Flow
Hazard, Soil Erodibility, Water Supply, and Composite Hazard maps. With all factors
considered, the group determined “zones of concern” by category 1-5 for the Poudre River.
The wildfire hazard in this area of the Front Range is high. Mr. Piehi referred to the very
dramatic effects from the 1996 Buffalo Creek fire. The debris from about 11 miles upstream
dammed the South Platte River and caused flooding for several hours. The Poudre River also
has many tributaries with the potential to carry debris.
The final report is complete, and stakeholders will work together on targets. Documents are
available on www.jw-associates.org.
Board discussion:
When will the genera/public be involved in this process? Mr. Piehl stated they have invited a
large number of people to participate and have had mixed response. The public will have
something specific to respond to later in the process as the stakeholders define actions for
specific targets.
How would you summarize the long-term goals? The goal is to allow water supply and
watershed management to be prioritized by landscape, so entities can adopt a forest-management
long-term approach to the watersheds to include forest restoration and an increase in species and
H-class diversity.
Water Board Minutes 2
March 17, 2011
Does the group plan to recommend thinning as a strategy to prevent a high severity fire? Yes.
How are post-fire conditions treated? It will be up to the stakeholders. BLirned Area Emergency
Rehabilitation is one process to consider. After the 2002 Heyman fire southwest of the metro
area, Denver Water missed a runoff season due to a six-month permitting process to put in
sediment basins. This approach would allow some areas to be pre-permitted.
Our watershed is on federal government land. How have other entities engaged the government
to do some of this work? Denver Water entered into a collaborative agreement with the US
Forest Service last fall with each entity agreeing to contribute S16 million over a ten-year period
to work on watersheds identified through this process. Summit County has also been very
successful in leveraging their funding 3 or 4 to 1 with grants and other available funds. The bark
beetle incident group appropriated $35 million; both the Poudre and Big Thompson watersheds
are considered in the geographical area, so this study may use some of those appropriated funds.
Related to the risk category map, an area appearing in green may actually be high-risk. Is there
a human asject that went into your risk assessment? Is the Front Range mimore susceptible
because of humnan ftictors such (is individuals burning trash and the number of individuals who
visit this area? A human risk factor was not included in the study. Risk is difficult to assess and
probabilities are difficult to assign. This approach looks at consequences rather than
probabilities.
Related to anticipated beetle kill areas, isfitel reduction the main defmisive strategy? The
Wildfire Hazard calculation included beetle-caused mortality. Reducing forest density is a good
strategy in some locations; some fuel breaks along existing roads may work in other areas.
Many experts in Colorado have assessed strategies over a period of time on those things which
can be manipulated.
Is the assessment being incorporated as an ongoing Forest Service program? This data has been
used to inform Forest Service planning decisions in several ongoing projects, such as the Pikes
Peak Environmental Assessment. For example, a decision notice was issued to treat 20,000
acres in the Pikes Peak region as a result of using these priorities.
Ms. Voytko noted this assessment helped identify what other stakeholders are looking at in the
Poudre Canyon and resulted in a better relationship with them. Staff plans to address this at the
next combined watershed meeting with the City of Greeley, the Tn-Districts, and other partners
in that group, and consider it in the 2012-20 13 budget cycles. Chairperson Janett noted the
opportunity for staff to seek this Board’s recommendation to Council.
Would this be a key item to include iii the Forest Management Plan? The Forest Service just
went out for public comment on a new planning process. These are typically 15 year projects.
2009 Global Reporting Initiative Report
(Presentation available upon request)
Water Board Minutes 3
March 17, 2011
Ms. Voytko and Environmental Planner Katy Bigner shared highlights of the Utilities’ 2009
Global Reporting Initiative (GRI) Report which included case studies of current projects, tables
displaying customer expectations, responses to customer and targeted action, and historical
perspective. A Readers Guide and index are provided as tools to navigate the report easily by
topic of interest.
In 2007, Utilities developed the 21 St Century Utility initiative to address some of the concerns
and issues facing Utilities in the future (aging workforce, knowledge transfer, succession
planning, revenue, financial stability, and the need for comprehensive asset management). Ms.
Voytko stated this reporting was developed as a way to provide accountability and
benchmarking. The 2009 report represents the third year Utilities has submitted a report to GRI
and was the first municipal utility to use the GRI framework. It is used by corporations such as
Duke Energy, American Electric Power, Pacific Gas & Electric, Xcel Energy, Dell Corporation,
Coca-Cola and AT&T.
Board members were asked:
- What expectations and concerns need to be addressed in the next report?
- What additional operational information would board members like to know?
- Please provide two or more suggestions for topics for the next report.
The Triple Bottom Line approach is being used to make both small-scale and large-scale
decisions at Utilities. The approach takes social, economic, and environmental factors into
account for decision-making.
The Fort Collins Utilities sustainability purpose statement reads, “Inspiring community
leadership by reducing environmental impact while benefitting customers, the economy, and
society.”
Chairperson Janett encouraged board members to read the report and send your suggestions to
Ms. Bigner at kbigner@fcgov.com or 970.221-63 17. The report is available at
www.fcgov.com/utilities/gri.
Board discussion:
Is this report and process about setting goals fir the future and making improvements where
baseline perftrinance data is available to measure against? Yes. The Utility has a lot of
environmental and other goals.
Customer and Employee Relations Patty Bigner noted the Utility completed the GRI Report for
three years and is still in the discovery phase, i.e., becoming more transparent in customer and
stakeholder reporting, seeking more alignment, etc.
A board member shared a concern that the City could do more to improve sustainability. The
board member sees a way to make our efforts more sustainable in the area of stormnwater
management through Low Impact Development (LiD) strategies, curb and gutter techniques, etc.
The City asks developers to look at sustainability in this area, yet the City is not always using
these techniques. Additional commnunication on LID strategies may be helpJul.
Water Board Minutes 4
March 17, 2011
Ms. Bigner related this comment to the sustainability reporting, which would take the approach
of reporting what Utilities has done about the community’s concern.
Council has adopted the policy and staff is working to implement upgrading our stormwater
criteria. Staff anticipates it from Council sometime this year.
Agricultural Water in Larimer County
(Presentation available upon request)
George Wallace with the Larirner County Agriculture Board attended the meeting to initiate
dialogue with the Board on water-sharing partnerships between the City of Fort Collins and the
agricultural sector. The Agriculture Advisory Board is charged with advising the Larimer
County Board of Commissioners on matters related to agriculture, including the County Master
Plan’s goal of minimizing the loss of agricultural land and water. Mr. Wallace introduced other
Agriculture Board members, Richard Seaworth and George Reed. His presentation focused on
the importance of rental water and future water sharing partnerships between agriculture and
urban interests.
Mr. Wallace reviewed the value of agricultural production in Larimer County:
- 1757 farms with $128,122,000 in sales;
- 199 farms sell $838,000 in agriculture products direct to consumers and sales are increasing
yearly; and
- 179 farms have developed value-added practices.
Only 63,000 acres are irrigated in Larimer County, and these acres do a lot to support the non-
irrigated areas.
Many large producers now depend on a combination of owned and rented water. Small
producers are even more dependent on water rental. Water is no longer sold (all or in part) with
the rural property when it is placed on the market.
Byproduct exchange opportunities also exist in the region between agricultural and the brewery
industry.
Production expenses contribute $1 13,500,000 into the local economy, and the agricultural sector
also provides many indirect benefits: locally grown food/fiber, open space, community
separators, wildlife habitat, robust economic activity, potential for water sharing, ground water
recharge, flood surge control, boating flows in July and August, and agricultural tourism.
Irrigated farmscapes are reservoirs. Water can be provided to Fort Collins in dry years through
water-sharing agreements. Irrigators could forego some of the rental water received from Fort
Collins and trade or lease some owned water to urban areas in dry years. In return, the
agricultural sector would rely on stable decrees for agricultural-use water and on rental water for
full production in normal years.
Board discussion:
Is the Agriculture Board looking fir ci regional operation of the system and coordination J
resources? Mr. Wallace noted our regional water supply is enmeshed. Agriculture is vulnerable
to changing decrees and dependent on access to rental water. Parties in the water business are
polarized and don’t talk to each other for mutual benefit. The current series, “A River Runs
Water Board Minutes 5
March 17, 2011
Through It”, provides a commonality of language and a mechanism for coming together to
discuss our goals. The Agriculture Board would like to facilitate better communication.
Board members expressed support
fr
discussing this proposal.
‘‘‘ Board Member Bovee departed at 7:13 p.m.
Canal Importation Ponds and Outfall (CIPO) Update
(Presentation available upon request)
Water Systems Engineering Manager Owen Randall introduced Special Projects Managers Dean
Saye and Matt Fater. The CIPO project was designed to provide flood mitigation in central Fort
Collins; 75 percent of the work was completed in 2008-2010 and the final phase will begin next
week. Areas near Taft Hill and Prospect roads p1-one to street flooding will also be addressed by
this project. The remainder of the Castlerock storm sewer will be completed this summer with
the closure of Glenmoot- Drive north of Elizabeth Street after Colorado State University’s
gradLiation. A parking lot and ti-ailhead, informational kiosks, and an outdoor classroom will he
added to complete Red Fox Meadows. Additional grading will be done in the Glenmoor
Detention Basin in August. Plant maintenance should be the only project segment to remain
after the end of the year.
A project budget of $21.5 million was set in 2001 to resolve the flooding issue. The project has
gone on to encompass more than originally planned. Through the 2010 projects, $15.9 million of
the budget has been spent. Projected 2011 costs are $5.4 million, and staff anticipates a total
project cost of $2 I .3 million, which will bring the project in under budget. An additional feature
may be added at Taft Hill Road and Glenmoor Di-ive foi- culverts to address severe road
overtopping.
More information is available at the project website: http://www.fcov.corn/utilities/what-we
do/stormwarer/drainae-irnpi-ovement-projects/canal-importation-ponds-and-outfa11.
Board discussion:
The pi-oject has provided the ability to have water in the ponds at all times.
A board member who lived in the Avery Park area noted a personal observation. The water
levels depicted on the 100-year flood map, is where i’ater was observed during the 1997 500-
year flood. During two subsequent 100-year floods, there was miot iiear the inundatio,i of water
that is shown on the City’s 100-year flood map. i/protection is imztended/r 100-year floods, it
seems to be an extremely expensive “over-reach” on the CTh’s part to design for flooding that
occurs only in 500-year floods. The board member asked Jim 1-libbard, was there any problem
during a 100 year event and he said there was no flooding. She was never against having a
project there but due to the cost and the environmental damage of CIPO, she felt the City could
have worked with what was there. Staff disagreed; design is based on statistical analysis of
rainfall, modeling of hydrology and stream channel data. Council directed staff to provide
protection for a 100-year event, and this project involved protection for 175 homes in a 100-year
flood scenai-io. The park areas may have been worked on before, hut this is the first time they
have been constructed and designed to satisfy this specific type of hood mitigation lbcus. This
project also serves as a basis for other projects to he completed to the west to mitigate street
Water Board Minutes 6
March 17, 2011
flooding and provides the foundation of a system to allow continued mitigation and restoration
elsewhere in the basin.
It’s unfortunate the ponds wit/i water in them that supported wild/ifè were lost because there
were turtles, beaver, many diffrent kinds of animals living there, and you can ‘t find many
animals there now. Staff has observed a variety of wildlife in the area — they’ve seen deer, fox,
other animals — let’s take perspective on the whole project. Damage was done sixty years ago
when development happened; the City is doing an excellent job of proactively restoring
wetlands, park and natural areas. The project has provided the ability to have water in the ponds
at all times.
The board member has not seemi evidence of aizy ponds wit/i ii’ater. There are no wetlands noii’.
Is that because they are not planted vet or not started growing yet? They are all planted now.
Wetlands will be re-established. Mechanisms are in place to control the water and keep it low
enough to prevent flooding the area, yet provide a constant water source. It may need adjustment
as droughts and wet periods occur.
Water was collected befre this /roject started due to underground drains in the middle section
and that water original/v went into Larimner No. 2 Canal. Is iiiore water coining out of the area
nuii’ than befre? The water now drains underneath into the CIPO segment at Spring Creek.
There was not a water right tied to the drain.
Why do we have so much bond debt, if it’s pay as you go?
The City changed its philosophy after the 1997 flood at Council direction and asked that all
master plan projects be built within twenty years and this had to be done through issuance of
debt. After 5-6 years, Council changed the direction and established that all future projects
would not incur debt and would be paid for in cash.
Committee Reports
Chairperson Janett asked committee chairs to send brief meeting notes to the full board. The
Instream Flow Committee sent recommendations to the full board and will return at the April
meeting seeking a recommendation. Please send your feedback to the full board.
Engineering Committee (Vice Chairperson Balderson): No report.
Water Conservation Committee (Board Member Phelan): No report.
Legislative, Finance and Legal Committee (Board Member Goldbach): No report.
Water Supply Committee (Boai-d Member Gessler): No report.
Adjournment
The meeting was adjourned at 7:53 p.m.
Submitted by Robin Pierce, Utilities Administrative Services Supervisor,Fort Collins Utilities
Approved by the Board on
2011
Signed:
5/7/iI
Board Secretary Date
Water Board Minutes 7
March 17, 2011