Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutWater Board - Minutes - 02/21/2013Water Board Minutes February 21, 2013 1 Fort Collins Utilities Water Board Minutes Thursday, February 21, 2013 Water Board Chairperson City Council Liaison Steve Malers, 484-1954 Wade Troxell, 219-8940 Water Board Vice Chairperson Staff Liaison Brett Bovee, 219-2747 Jon Haukaas, 221-6671 Roll Call Board Present Vice Chairperson Steve Malers, Board Members Brian Brown, Becky Goldbach, Brett Bovee, Eric Garner, Liesel Hans, Lori Brunswig, Andrew McKinley, Heidi Huber-Stearns, Duncan Eccleston, and Phil Phelan Staff Present Jon Haukaas, Kevin Gertig, Lance Smith, Susan Smolnik, Beth Molenaar, Laurie D’Audney, Donnie Dustin, Lisa Rosintoski, Ken Sampley, Molly Wendell, Wanda Nelson, and Harriet Davis Guests Pranaya Sathe, Shea Coons, Megan Wade, Robert Heer, Dale Morehouse, George Mattis, and Sam McCarter Meeting Convened Vice Chairperson Malers called the meeting to order at 5:30 p.m. Public Comment None Officer Elections Vice Chairperson Steve Malers nominated himself for Chairperson. Vote on the motion: It passed unanimously. Board Member Brett Bovee nominated himself for Vice Chairperson. Vote on the motion: It passed unanimously. Approval of January 17, 2013 Minutes Board Member Brown moved to approve the minutes of the January 17, 2013 meeting. Board Member Goldbach seconded the motion. Vote on the motion: It passed unanimously. Work Session Review Chairperson Malers gave on an update on the February Work Session. Policy and Project Manager Dan Weinheimer presented a legislative review. The board also listened to a presentation on the Fossil Creek Stream Restoration project, an update on the Rigden Gravel Pit project, and a discussion on Water Treatment Regionalization. Water Board Minutes February 21, 2013 2 Establishing Rental Procedures, Rates, and Delivery Charges for the City’s Raw Water for the 2013 Irrigation Season (Attachment available upon request). Water Resources Engineer Susan Smolnik introduced the item and introduced Water Resources Engineer Beth Molenaar. This item is typically brought to the board in February of each year. Ms. Smolnik stated that even though no surplus water is expected this year, sale and delivery charges should be set. Highlights from the discussion:  A board member asked about the response to date from North Poudre Irrigation Company (NPIC) shareholders about swapping. Ms. Smolnik stated that 182 shares have been swapped so far. Ms. Smolnik and Ms. Molenaar attended the NPIC Annual Meeting in February to explain the swapping process. The swap form and information was sent to the shareholders at the beginning of this week.  A board member asked about the number of shareholders. Ms. Smolnik stated there are approximately 2,000 – 2,500 shareholders.  A board member asked about the financial impact of the lost rental revenue. Ms. Smolnik stated there could potentially be lost revenue of $500,000.  A board member asked about the future impact of the swap. Ms. Molenaar stated a North Poudre share is a combination of municipal water and agricultural (ag) water. The City owns 3,500 shares of North Poudre water. Each share has a portion of ag water the City cannot use. This water is typically rented back to the North Poudre shareholders. This year, the City will give the shareholders 1.5 acre feet of ag water in exchange for 1 acre foot of municipal water. Discussion on the motion: There was no discussion on the motion. Vote on the motion: It passed unanimously. Recommendation on 2013 Water Supply Management Action Plan/Monthly Water Resources Report/Water Supply Outlook (Attachments available upon request). Water Engineering and Field Operations Manager Jon Haukaas introduced the item and introduced Water Resources Manager Donnie Dustin. This item was presented as a Staff Report for City Council on February 5, 2013 to describe the uncertainty of the Poudre River water supply and the Colorado Big Thompson (CBT) Project. The Water Supply Shortage Response Plan, Ordinance 048, 2003, recommends water rate adjustments for Response Levels 2, 3, and 4. Why Water Restrictions?  Poudre River supply uncertain due to the High Park Fire effects on water quality  CBT (Horsetooth Reservoir) quota unknown until early April  Persistent extreme drought conditions Mr. Dustin presented a Colorado SNOTEL Snowpack Update Map highlighting poor snowpack conditions. He also presented the U.S. Seasonal Drought Outlook as of February 7, 2013. Board Member Eccleston moved that the Water Board recommend the proposed rental procedures, rates and delivery charges be adopted by City Council. Board Member Brown seconded the motion. Water Board Minutes February 21, 2013 3 Mr. Dustin presented the Water Supply Shortage Response Plan showing the differences between Response Level 1, 2, 3, and 4. Level 1 restrictions will go into effect April 1, 2013. The Level 1 Watering Schedule includes no lawn watering between 10 a.m. and 6 p.m. and no lawn watering on Mondays. Response Level Rate Adjustments Strategic Financial Planning Manager Lance Smith presented this information. Mr. Smith presented a graph on the Revenue Loss by Response Level. There will be no rate adjustment with Response Level 1. It will be absorbed through the reserves. Rate adjustments are allowed with Level 2, 3, and 4 restrictions. Staff is seeking Council approval for all levels. Mr. Smith presented the following graphs:  Single Family Rates by Response Level (a fourth tier has been added)  Duplex Rates by Response Level (a fourth tier has been added)  Multi-Family Rates by Response Level  Commercial Rates by Response Level Excess Water Use Surcharge Rates by Response Level Customers are given an annual allotment based on the amount of raw water supplied for the account. The allotment may be increased through additional water rights or cash in-lieu of water rights. Highlights from the discussion:  A board member asked how many customers exceeded their allotment last year. Mr. Smith stated less than 10 percent of the commercial customers exceeded their allotment.  A board member asked how the allotment is determined. Mr. Haukaas stated this is determined by the City Code.  A board member asked for staff to elaborate on the Drought Response Plan. Mr. Smith stated the rates for single family, duplex, multi-family, and commercial are part of the Drought Response Plan. The Excess Water Use Surcharge is not part of the Drought Response Plan.  A board member asked if there is enough education for customers to incorporate water conservation and xeriscaping. Mr. Haukaas stated Utilities has a Water Conservation Program. Water Conservation Specialists are available to provide water audits for customers on their usage and suggest ways to incorporate xeriscaping and low water plants in their yards. Communication and Public Engagement Customer Connections Manager Lisa Rosintoski presented this information. Key steps taken include communicated awareness in the 2012 year-end letter to customers, interviews with the media, no CBT water rented to agriculture, and the Water Supply Management Action Plan. The Water Supply Management Action Plan is a comprehensive document to recognize the problem, ways to monitor the water, how to recognize the Water Supply Response Plan, and how to communicate this information to the community. The plan also includes violation management. Staff will communicate restriction response levels by providing extensive customer communication, monitoring water supply, offering water efficiency rebates, and creating an icon to visually support awareness. Water Board Minutes February 21, 2013 4 Next Actions Include the Following:  March: utility bill insert  March 5 and 19 City Council: ordinance to set rates for higher response levels  April 12: CBT quota set  April 23: City Council Work Session  Ongoing: communication and outreach to public and key stakeholders Ms. Rosintoski presented the Water Supply Management Action Plan 2013 Timeline outlining actions from February through May. Highlights from the discussion:  A board member asked if his Homeowners Association (HOA) could receive e-mails regarding the water restriction information. Ms. Rosintoski stated staff will contact HOAs requesting to be a part of their e-mail and newsletter distribution lists.  A board member asked if the City website has been updated with this information. Ms. Rosintoski stated the website has been updated. The information is available at http://www.fcgov.com/utilities/what-we-do/water/water-supply-demand/water- restrictions/.  A board member asked how the use of Advanced Meters will coincide with the restriction plan. Mr. Haukaas stated the customers should be able to monitor their real time usage by the May/June timeframe.  A board member asked how staff will communicate the table of rate changes. Ms. Rosintoski stated this will be communicated to customers as part of the Utility bill insert.  A board member feels it is important to distinguish between ongoing conservation and the current drought restrictions. The board member feels water levels should be communicated to customers.  A board member asked how Utilities will enforce the restrictions. Since the Water Supply Management Action Plan includes an enforcement section, Utilities will hire additional staff to monitor usage. Packets of information will be sent to customers who violate the restrictions. Utilities priority is to inform and educate customers first and foremost. Fines are used as a last resort.  A board member asked about fines. The fines vary from $50 to $1,000. In 2002, 28 warnings and three tickets were issued. In 2003, 5 warnings were issued. No tickets were issued in 2003.  A board member asked if there has been any data from the Advanced Meters identifying water leaks. Mr. Haukaas stated the Meter Data Management System has identified some leaks in certain properties. These customers have been notified of the leaks.  A board member inquired about the modeling predictions and timeline for starting Level 2 restrictions. Mr. Dustin stated this cannot be predicted yet; however, the Water Supply Response Plan gives the City Manager the ability to initiate Level 2 restrictions if necessary. Staff proposed a friendly amendment to the motion to include wording on the Excess Water Use Surcharge. The original ordinance from 2003 did not include the surcharge. Vice Chairperson Bovee moved that the Water Board support the adoption of Ordinance ##, 2013, increasing water rates consistent with the City’s Water Supply Shortage Response Plan, Ordinance 048, 2003, for Response Levels 2, 3, and 4. Board Member Brown seconded the motion. Water Board Minutes February 21, 2013 5 Discussion on the motion: There was no discussion on the motion. Vote on the motion: It passed unanimously. Poudre River Floodplain Regulations (Attachments available upon request). Mr. Haukaas introduced the item and introduced Stormwater and Floodplain Program Manager Ken Sampley. Mr. Sampley presented the purpose of the Poudre River Floodplain Regulations Review:  Review of the Poudre River Floodplain Regulations is the final component of the Stormwater Repurposing effort.  Review focused on whether revisions were needed to better address foreseeable flooding risks to improve life safety and reduce property damage using a sustainable approach that considers environmental, economic, and social factors.  Thorough investigation and extensive public outreach over the last two years. As a result of the extensive investigations and public outreach, proposed revisions have evolved over time. The original regulations included three options. A fourth option has been added to allow non-residential development that meets the Adverse Impact Review (AIR) Criteria. This item was presented to the Water Board in 2010 and 2011. Mr. Sampley presented the Water Board recommendation from September 2011. The item was also presented at a City Council Work Session in October 2011. Mr. Sampley presented Council’s direction to Staff. Staff and a working committee met five times between February and June 2012. Mr. Sampley presented the committee’s original recommendations:  Discontinue the development of a scalable Adverse Impact Review (AIR) regulation for the Poudre River.  Stormwater and PFA staff should develop final code language to implement the following life-safety criteria. Upon further consideration and detailed evaluation, Stormwater and PFA staff determined it was impractical and infeasible for many properties adjacent to the Poudre to construct fire apparatus roads to meet the proposed maximum flooding depth of six inches. Staff proposed revising the Emergency Response and Preparedness Plan (ERPP) requirements to create a “performance-based” regulation:  Eliminates the requirement to construct elevated emergency access roads  Requires that procedures be established for evacuation a minimum of two hours in advance when flood waters will impact the site and/or any portion of the designated evacuation routes. This places more emphasis on life safety through advance warning and evacuation. Amended Motion: Vice Chairperson Bovee moved that the Water Board support the adoption of Ordinance ##, 2013, increasing water rates for Level 2, 3, and 4 of the City’s Water Supply Shortage Response Plan and the Excess Water Use Surcharge for all levels. Board Member Brown seconded the motion. Water Board Minutes February 21, 2013 6 Staff presented their rational for eliminating the fire apparatus road 6 inch maximum flooding depth criteria to the Working Committee on February 4, 2013. The Working Committee discussed the new approach and provided feedback and comments. The Working Committee revised its recommendation to concur with that of Staff. This information was presented to the Chamber of Commerce on February 8, 2013. Staff presented the rationale. The attendees discussed the new approach and provided feedback and comments. The information was also discussed by the North Fort Collins Business Association (NFCBA). The NFCBA is in support of the updated approach; however, they did have questions concerning liability, training, costs, etc. Mr. Sampley presented a summary of the code language provisions. He also presented the ERPP, including a template, example, and annual checklist form. Staff recommends the existing Poudre River floodplain regulations be revised to incorporate the proposed code language introducing the requirement that a site-specific ERPP be prepared, implemented and maintained for additions, substantial improvements, change of occupancy, redevelopment and/or new development within the 100-Year floodplain. Additional Considerations  Staff maintains that the natural and beneficial functions of the Poudre River are best addressed in the Land Use Code, most notably the Poudre River Buffer requirements.  Adoption of new Floodplain Rules and Regulations for the State of Colorado as approved by the CWCB  Will be presented to the Water Board in late summer/early fall 2013. Highlights from the discussion:  A board member expressed concern about the effectiveness of this approach.  A board member questioned the liability related to the ERPP Template. The board member suggested the form should have a signature line for the engineer completing the form.  A board member inquired about the consequence of not conducting an annual update. Mr. Sampley stated there is not an enforcement provision; however, an annual update would be required prior to any subsequent development review actions or approvals.  A board member suggested the form should have a section concerning if the property owner has been notified of changes to the floodplain.  The board members and staff discussed the concept of more stringent floodplain regulations versus the proposed emergency plan.  A board member feels new buildings should not be constructed in the floodplain. The board member feels the ERPP Plans are not sufficient and that individuals will still be at risk. The board member is also concerned about the rise to the floodplain if there are new developments.  A board member feels there is not political support from Council to keep new developments from being constructed in the floodplain.  A board member asked for clarification on how many new structures this applies to. The difficulties of predicting future development on the relatively small number of remaining parcels in the 100-Year floodplain were discussed. Water Board Minutes February 21, 2013 7  A key concern has been protecting the natural and beneficial functions of the Poudre River near the Link-N-Greens property. The proposed Woodward development was identified as a success story of how existing floodplain regulations and natural resources buffer regulations can work together to achieve property protection and improve natural and beneficial functions of the floodplain.  A board member asked how often the ERPP process will be reviewed. Mr. Sampley stated this will likely occur when the Poudre River floodplain is remapped as part of the FEMA RiskMAP program in 2015 or 2016.  A board member asked for clarification on how sediment from the High Park Fire will impact the floodplain within the next 10 – 15 years. Mr. Sampley stated sediment will have an impact on the floodplain as well as the water supply and measures may need to be taken. Mr. Haukaas reiterated that staff has no way to know the effects at this time.  The board members and staff discussed future modeling for the floodplain.  Mr. Haukaas suggested the board take action on what staff is proposing. If there are additional actions that staff should take related to the issue, the board can offer their suggestions.  A board member supports the suggested motion because it is a step forward, but feels it does not go far enough to protect the floodplain. Discussion on the motion: A board member would like to recommend that City Council consider no new structures in the floodplain. The board member feels this would still allow staff to move forward with the proposed regulations. The board discussed a friendly amendment to the motion. Vote on the motion: 10 for, 1 against. Reason for the nay vote: Board Member Brunswig: The plans are not enough and will not be implemented or followed correctly to serve the intended purpose. Board Member Brown moved that in order to mitigate life-safety hazards, the Water Board recommend that the existing Poudre River floodplain regulations be revised to incorporate the proposed code language introducing the requirement that a site-specific Emergency Response and Preparedness Plan be prepared and implemented for additions, substantial improvements, change of occupancy, redevelopment and/or new development within the 100-Year floodplain. Board Member Garner seconded the motion. Amended Motion: Board Member Brown moved that in order to mitigate life-safety hazards, the Water Board recommend that the existing Poudre River floodplain regulations be revised to incorporate the proposed code language introducing the requirement that a site-specific Emergency Response and Preparedness Plan be prepared and implemented for additions, substantial improvements, change of occupancy, redevelopment and/or new development within the 100-Year floodplain. The Water Board would further recommend that City Council consider excluding new developments or structures within the 100-year floodplain. Board Member Garner seconded the motion.