Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutNatural Resources Advisory Board - Minutes - 10/15/2014NATURAL RESOURCES ADVISORY BOARD REGULAR MEETING WEDNESDAY, OCTOBER 15, 2014 DATE: Wednesday, October 15, 2014 LOCATION: 215 N. Mason Conference Room 1-A TIME: 6:00–8:30pm For Reference: Joe Piesman, Chair 970-691-6697 Bob Overbeck, Council Liaison 970-988-9337 Susie Gordon, Staff Liaison 970-221-6265 Present: Joseph Piesman, Chair Harry Edwards Alexa Barratt Robert Mann Rob Cagen Joe Halseth John Bartholow Absent: Liz Pruessner Staff Present: Susie Gordon, Staff Liaison Dianne Tjalkens, Admin/Board Support Ginny Sawyer, Policy & Project Manager Amy Lewin, Transportation Planner Ted Shepard, Chief Planner Guests: David Tweedale, citizen Call meeting to order: Joe Piesman called the meeting to order at 6:02pm. Review and Approval of September 17, 2014 minutes Harry moved and Rob seconded a motion to approve the September 17, 2014 NRAB minutes as presented. Motion passed unanimously, 6-0-0. AGENDA ITEM 1—Building on Basics 2 Ginny Sawyer, Policy & Project Manager in the City Manager’s Office, provided an update on the package of capital projects being developed for the April 2015 ballot, when citizens will vote on whether to extend the City’s ¼-cent sales tax. Ginny Sawyer reviewed the sales tax extension process to date. Staff have presented Council with a platform of projects totaling $79.5M for prioritization. Council moved the downtown restroom project into the proposed budget and moved EPIC renovations and Trails funds out. Downtown River Enhancement will get $1M from Natural Areas with the remainder proposed to be funded in the tax. Water sustainability projects have support. Projects “below the line” that Council asked for more information on include housing for the homeless, the community marketplace, and others. For the Creative Center (southeast recreation center), option B would get an outdoor leisure pool when the public completes fundraising for an indoor lap pool; another option is to partner with Poudre School District on a competitive pool. The Creative Center is at $9.5M; it would cost $4.5M more to add the pool, with significantly higher annual maintenance costs. Arterial improvements that include bike and pedestrian separated crossings, as well as Lincoln Avenue design work, are in the proposed budget. Vine/Lemay and South Timberline intersections have been pulled out but there is discussion of moving those projects to a second proposed ¼ cent tax. Ted Shepard noted that Timberline Road is being used a lot by people commuting from Windsor. Staff will complete cost and O&M refinements, and conduct more outreach to the community. Capital dollars that will be available are closer to $73M. For the December 9 worksession, staff will provide Council with package options, then return at the first regular meeting in January with ballot language for the April ballot. The street maintenance tax is up for renewal in April as well; it accounts for half of the street maintenance budget. Discussion/Q & A: • Rob said the community marketplace is expensive. Ginny said staff is looking at matching funds, possible locations, and a keystone retailer. • John asked why there is a change from seven years to four years of included O&M costs. Ginny said part of it is due to accounting issues, and part is having more capital dollars. John asked whether after four years, the O&M is assumed to be included into the City budget. Ginny said yes. • Joe Piesman asked when the separation takes place between the BFO and BOB2, for projects that are currently on both lists. Ginny said Council is making final budget decisions in the next four weeks. The community recycling center is not above the line for BOB2. We want to have a really clear idea of what we can make happen and the ballot language has to be very specific in order for funding to be dedicated to that specific project. • Ginny asked how the board feels about the BOB2 name, noting that once it goes to ballot, a citizen committee will take over and could name it whatever they want. John suggested using Building on Basics. Harry said BOB2 sounds like an insider’s name and doesn’t speak to the public. Joe Piesman agreed. • Susie asked when the committee is appointed, how they are selected, etc. Ginny is unsure how the process will happen. However, if people are interested, she would like to have names and contact information. Joe asked what someone needs in order to be on the committee. Ginny said people who can run the campaign: treasurer, marketer, people who are well connected and able to put signs up and do education. • Rob said he was on committee for KFCG and has list of contacts he can share with Ginny. Ginny added that a committee for the Street Maintenance sales tax extension may be needed as well. • Joe Piesman said John Stokes took some members on a tour of the downtown reach of the Poudre River. At that time there was more hardscape in the plan, and some on the tour were adamant that Natural Areas funds not be used for recreation purposes according to the tax initiative that brought in that money for Natural Areas. Joe noted that there is a lot involved in the project including habitat protection, flood mitigation and recreation. Ginny agreed that funds are meant to be used very specifically; for instance, Stormwater funds will only be used for stormwater purposes. For the 2 Downtown River project, $4M will come from BOB2, $2M from the regular City budget, $1M from Natural Areas, along with additional funding from Stormwater. • Joe asked about the Nature in the City project. Ginny said it is still above the line. Climate Action Projects are below the line, but may get funds through the BFO process. Ginny added that she hopes to have the website updated soon. AGENDA ITEM 2— NRAB Alignment with City’s Seven Key Outcome Areas Ginny Sawyer, Policy & Project Manager, discussed directions set by Council for Boards and Commissions to align 2015 work plans with the City’s Key Outcome areas. Ginny explained that there have been many ideas presented during Council’s discussions in the past year about boards’ and commissions’ roles; boards’ work, the City’s strategic plan and budgeting are all being aligned to the key outcome areas. The chart provided by the Clerk’s Office is staffs’ first run at identifying areas of alignment. There are some that overlap more than one outcome area, so they are differentiated with primary, secondary and tertiary alignments. Feedback is welcome. It is helpful for board work plans to look at their primary outcome area and identify strategic objectives in that area. Discussion/Q & A: • Joe Piesman said the board could look the City’s strategic plan (http://www.fcgov.com/citymanager/pdf/strategic-plan-2015.pdf) before the November meeting in order to identify objectives that match the board’s goals. • Joe Halseth mentioned that the Bicycle Committee is a sub-board that is not on the list. He wonders how many more there are. Susie said the only other she could think of is the West Nile committee. Joe Piesman noted that sub-boards do not report directly to Council. AGENDA ITEM 3— West Central Area Plan Amy Lewin, Transportation Planner, and Ted Shepard, Chief Planner, reviewed preliminary approaches, policy recommendations, and projects being considered for the West Central Area Plan, which goes to Council for consideration of adoption in March. Amy described that the area of focus for the West Central Area Plan is mainly west and south of the CSU main campus, with special effort focused on the Prospect Corridor. CSU is expecting enrollment to grow, and there have been discussions of an on-campus stadium, as well. Policy topic areas include: land use and neighborhood character, transportation and mobility, and open space networks. Ultimately staff will come up with an implementation action plan and specific policy and project recommendations. Staff is anticipating going to Council for consideration of adoption in March 2015. Community engagement has included online options, walking and bike tours, listening sessions, as well as public Open Houses, workshops, and other events. The second online survey is available now. The existing conditions include a mix of stable residential neighborhoods, high student population, and multifamily housing. There are key areas for redevelopment, as well as historical properties. There is a lot of pressure on the arterials for cars, bikes and pedestrians. Existing open space networks include Roland Moore Park and natural areas. The Prospect Corridor from Shields to 3 College is particularly challenging for bikes and pedestrians. There has been discussion of an underpass at Centre. There is interest from CSU, so there is opportunity for a partnership. Staff is looking at the potential for underpasses and at-grade crossing improvements at other key sites in the area as well. Staff has collaborated with CSU throughout the project to incorporate university growth plans into the transportation planning. Amy gave a handout on vision statements for each key area. Ted said there are disconnects in the open space network with the exception of the Spring Creek Trail. Staff aspires to achieve access to nature, recreation, and environmental stewardship opportunities, with better connection of existing spaces. Staff would also like to fill in the gaps in the urban street trees. Wildlife corridors will be preserved and enhanced, and they will use a comprehensive ecological approach to stormwater management. Potential improvements include low-water landscaping, work along irrigation canals, and bike trail enhancements. There are opportunities for open space within multifamily developments, as well as through pocket parks and community gardens. Ted asked the Board to give feedback on open space habitat connectivity, how they are doing with multifamily, additional trails, etc. Discussion/Q & A: • Joe Piesman said he thinks some of the highest bike accident areas are near West Elizabeth. The rush of students on that arterial is huge. There are no lights and they are running for the bus. The area needs help. The Shields/Prospect area is busy too. Amy said they know there are safety issues on West Elizabeth and will additionally be looking at it through the West Elizabeth Enhanced Travel Corridor Plan that has recently been reinstated in the proposed 2015-16 City budget. • Joe said the work here for open spaces seems related to Nature in the City. Ted said this plan looks at some specific ditch crossings and staff is collaborating with Lindsay Ex. • Rob expressed concern about issues that the Sheeley neighborhood next to the university continues to aggressively assert; they don’t seem to factor in the need to deal with the university and the issues it creates. Ted said these neighbors have a tough time making a left turn out of their subdivision onto Prospect. Residents are always fighting the issues on that road. Once we get through the stadium issue, we can move on. However, the long-term growth of the university will have a greater impact than eight game days per year. As for holding concerts at the Gardens on Spring Creek, recent sound tests went well. It is 55 decibels of music. For 1,500 people, you need at least 90 decibels (Db). Staff took sound meters to see if they could get 55 dB at the neighborhoods with the sound board at 90 Db. Rob asked if they measured behind the stage area and Ted said it was low. For some it would be acceptable to have music performed at the Gardens eight weekends of the year ending at 8:00 at night; for others it may be unacceptable. It may require another test. The turnout was disappointing and may need additional marketing. The sound affects the same neighborhood that faces Prospect. Staff is also looking at options for improving sidewalk conditions in that area. • Joe Piesman said there is a small open space near Ram’s Village, a detention pond, where it would be nice to have more plantings. Ted said it belongs to the apartment complex and the manager is on the Stakeholder Committee. • Joe Piesman added that the Red Fox Meadows Natural Area turned a detention pond into a nice area. He wonders if staff has numbers to support greater use. Ted said he has heard anecdotal evidence of increased use. • Joe Piesman asked if there are other specific natural areas under consideration. Ted said there is an area that can be a regional collection point for stormwater near the Vet Teaching Hospital. 4 • John asked if there are other stormwater-challenged areas. Ted said yes. They struggle with how much public money to bring in to make regional detention areas, when a developer could come in and do it for us. • Joe Piesman said the regional stormwater detention areas are a good idea. • Amy said staff has had one worksession with Council and will return for another in November, with potential adoption of the West Central Area Plan in March. • Bob mentioned the Nature in the City goal of having access to nature within a 10-minute walk, and he wonders how these interface. Ted said staff is working with Lindsay Ex toward the same aspirations. We would like to shine a light on these three square miles and how it interfaces with the community, university and MAX, and use this as a demonstration area to point to in the future. • Bob said Nature in the City is discussing living walls and pocket parks and could work well with this plan. • Amy and Ted agreed to return to the board in February to discuss providing a recommendation on the West Central Area Plan to Council. • Rob thanked staff for putting effort into this area, as he is a resident of the area. • Joe said bringing focus to this area is good, with all the attention the mall has been getting. • Joe Halseth asked about the Lincoln Corridor Plan. Amy said there is a BFO offer for Lincoln Avenue Final Design; although it is not being recommended for funding, the project is currently included in the BOB2 project list. Regarding the neighborhood projects outlined in the Lincoln Corridor Plan, signage encouraging peaceful activity of brewery patrons will be done this year. Also, a handful of other projects related to the Lincoln Corridor are included in a BFO offer recommended for funding in the proposed 2015-16 budget. • Joe Piesman asked if the Lincoln Avenue bridge over the Poudre will be replaced. Amy said it will need to be replaced a little sooner than some others in the city and is being monitored by Engineering, but there is no specific project timeline for the bridge yet. AGENDA ITEM 4— Organics Composting Opportunities & Constraints Susie Gordon, Sr. Environmental Planner, briefly reviewed current conditions in the local and regional community that play a role in Fort Collins’ ability to divert organics from landfill disposal. Susie said the prospects of building an organics transfer station may be the best option at this time. City staff met with Larimer County last week and it was determined this would be a suitable way to deal with the material. With that model in mind, the idea from the City is to design a transfer station to handle two separate streams of organics: food scraps and yard waste. That concept is also very affordable. She spoke with A1 Organics and penciled out a number. The project would need a structure to hold food scraps in inclement weather. Food scraps would be removed every day to the Heartland bio-digester being built near Kersey (10 miles southeast of Greeley), which is already generating methane from a covered lagoon. The biodigesters’ gas is being purchased by the City of Sacramento. Heartland will ultimately be the largest bio-digester in the country. The location was selected due to proximity to slaughterhouses and Leprino foods. A1 operates a composting facility in Ault, but is still working on permits to accept food scraps there and the only other permitted location is in Commerce City, which is too far. A1 Organics picks up from restaurants, and in the future grocery stores could also supply the bio-digester. The Larimer County Landfill has about 10 years left. They must start planning a new landfill within the next few years. These types of decisions will need to be 5 made soon. Council is willing to approve a .5FTE planner to help with this, and is also willing to approve a “walk-on” offer for waste-stream optimization. In the proposal, some funding would be used to: help Drake Water Reclamation facility bio-digesters increase capacity; give more scrutiny to waste–to-energy projects; and, seek a grant writer to help develop collaborations with CSU research and development departments. CSU generates a lot of food waste and has been using an in-vessel system, but it cannot take all of the food waste. The dining halls are grinding the food scraps to make ready for composting, but the material is heavy and challenging. Poudre School District is also interested in composting food waste, from students’ lunch meals. The transfer station would have a yard waste component, too. Discussion/Q & A: • Rob asked if food waste includes fats and meats. Susie said yes, and to some extent it could include some of the paperware and compostable to-go packaging. • Rob asked about the City-owned property where the solids from the Drake Water Reclamation Facility go (Meadow Springs Ranch). They haul bio-solid sludge materials there, spread it on the ground, etc. Could the material be digested there instead? Susie said that Meadow Springs is specifically oriented to land-applying the compost from DWRF but has not been considered as a site for active composting to take place. While the City could run a composting facility, that is not on the table now because of the level of commitment and expense it takes in terms of operations and management. • Alexa asked if staff has looked at the city of Louisville’s composting program. Susie said Louisville is part of Western Disposal’s program. The company has a 12-acre windrow facility in Boulder, but she doesn’t know of anyone in our area willing to step forward like Western Disposal to build the facility. • Joe Halseth asked where CSU’s food scraps go. Susie said the in-vessel system (nicknamed “Oscar”) is on the north side of West Laporte Avenue where they also have piles of used animal bedding that are combined with the food waste and used by another company. • Joe Piesman asked about possibility of curbside food waste. Susie said Gallegos accepts yard waste. It is possible to combine yard waste with food scraps, but by doing so, you lose the ability to capture methane from the food scraps as it would get composted with the yard waste. The regular collection routes for food scraps would likely focus on the grocery produce and food manufacturing industries. • Alexa said backyard composting should be encouraged for residents who want to compost. Susie said the City can put more effort into educating residents on how to do at-home composting. • Joe Piesman asked if the recycling center is still above the line. Susie said yes, and that the recycling center is intended to be able to accept yard waste. It could be possible for a site to be selected for the recycling center that could also accommodate a compost collection/transfer station. • Bob said for the transfer station we are talking about yard waste. Susie clarified that yard waste would be ground up on site, for better transport to a composting facility, and that food scraps would be accepted there, separate from yard waste. AGENDA ITEM 5—Other Business Plastic Bag Ordinance Update 6 • Susie said Council has on their October 21 hearing agenda a decision to select from one of three options: repeal the disposable bag ordinance, refer it to the April election, or refer it to a special election. • Rob asked why it is more expensive to have it on an election that is already happening. Susie is unsure how the costs are accrued. However, there are tax initiatives on the April ballot, so it may be less than ideal to go to election. • Joe Piesman said there is an issue with whether those in disagreement with the bag ordinance could affect the taxes being passed. • Bob said it is like a carrot - showing that you can get 2,600 people together and change the direction of the City. Could a voluntary program be implemented in 2015, to collect data on in 2016? It is really wise to back down from a petition drive and not just take it to the voters? Grocers may not object that much because they have already agreed to this all over other parts of the country. It may be bad policy to walk away because you have vocal opposition from a relatively small group of people. If it gets voted down, so what, but at least it is the people of the City making the decision. • Joe Piesman said he sees this as a continuation of the “trash wars.” In that the opposition organized and presented themselves to Council. To let this be rescinded because of a couple thousand people is questionable. • Joe Piesman asked the legal obligations. Susie said Council must respond within a certain number of days from verification of signatures. Joe said if you go online and look up bag fee initiatives, there are 140 cities that have adopted ordinance; but, we would also not be the first to rescind. • Joe Piesman said as City Council debates this, he encourages people to keep their eye on the prize of reducing plastic bags used. Can staff continue efforts to encourage voluntary action? Susie said Bob’s suggestion on a voluntary program is good; however, grocers are unlikely to provide baseline information about bag usage as it is proprietary. • Bob said Councilmembers need to be thinking outside the box on solutions. Climate Action Committee Update Harry said the charge to the committee is to develop a proposed updated Climate Action Plan to achieve reduced GHG emissions. 50% of GHG emissions are associated with generation of electricity; 24% from transportation; and 19% from natural gas use. He showed a graph of adjustments to the emissions based on various factors. The graph shows that even with all of the best concepts there remains a gap between reduction and the goal. 75% of electricity generated by Platte River is from burning coal. They have some wind and other renewables, but it has low impact thus far. Even with Platte River’s plans to implement more renewables, there remains a gap between Fort Collins’ goal and their emissions. There also remains a gap between what is do-able with what is available now and what is required by the City ordinance. Brendle has constructed an array on various proposals to reduce GHG emissions. This includes cost-benefit criteria. Unless we stop burning coal, we can never achieve 100% reduction. Harry feels building our own solar plant is a major business opportunity for this region. Other states have laid out guidelines for green power. A lot of companies are coming up with creative financing to get this done. Harry showed a photo of the Ivanpah solar facility in California. They use heliostats to focus sunlight to create steam and power generators. The industry seems to be moving toward solar thermal, rather than PV. Other innovative ideas from Rocky Mountain Institute (RMI) include mandatory conversion to solar electric and removal of all on-street parking. 7 • Joe Halseth asked if the last slide takes into account that the Craig plant will be retired at some point. Harry said no, but that input is minimal and could be replaced through more coal burning at Rawhide. • Joe Piesman asked about the deadline. Harry said January/February. Brendle is doing a good job digging up data from various sources and RMI has great minds as well. The committee will be offered a set of recommendations for approval. • Bob asked to receive Harry’s slides. • Joe Halseth asked where the hydro comes from. Rob said primarily WAPA and Bonneville dam. • Bob added that Phil Friedman had a Soapbox in the Coloradoan recently and asked members to read it. Review City Council’s 6-Month Planning Calendar/Agenda Planning • November—Lucinda will update board on CAP and 2015 Work Plan Adjournment: Alexa moved to adjourn. Harry seconded. Meeting adjourned at 8:22pm. Approved by the Board on November 19, 2014 Signed ____________________________________ 11/26/2014 Dianne Tjalkens, Administrative Clerk II Date 8