Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutWater Board - Minutes - 11/19/20151 Water Board Minutes November 19, 2015 Fort Collins Utilities Water Board Minutes Thursday, November 19, 2015 Water Board Chairperson City Council Liaison Steve Malers, 970-484-1954 Wade Troxell, 970-219-8940 Water Board Vice Chairperson Staff Liaison Becky Hill, 970-402-1713 Jon Haukaas, 970-221-6671 ROLL CALL Board Present: Chairperson Steve Malers, Vice Chairperson Rebecca Hill, Board Members Brett Bovee, Brian Brown, Michael Brown, Alex Maas, Andrew McKinley and Phyllis Ortman. Board Absent: Duncan Eccleston, Lori Brunswig, and Kent Bruxvoort. OTHERS PRESENT Staff: Kevin Gertig, Jon Haukaas, Basil Hamdan, Adam Jokerst, and Jill Oropeza. Members of the Public: Nicole Crace, Fores (illegible), Kevin Pallotti, and Dick Jefferies Additional Presenters: Jen Kovecses/Coalition for the Poudre Watershed Meeting Convened Chairperson Malers called the meeting to order at 5:30 p.m. Public Comment None. Chairperson Malers requested that all students in attendance introduce themselves. Board Member Service Recognition Brian Brown was recognized for his eight years on the board by the Utilities staff. His appointment ends in December 2015. Approval of October, 2015 Board Meeting Minutes Board Member Rebecca Hill moved to approve the minutes of the October 15, 2015, meeting. Board Member Michael Brown seconded the motion. Vote on the motion: It passed unanimously, 6-0.* *Board Members Bovee, Maas and McKinley abstained due to their absence at the October meeting. 2 Water Board Minutes November 19, 2015 Staff Reports (Attachments available upon request) Monthly Water Resources Report Water Resources Engineer Adam Jokerst reported water demand in October was higher than projected at 113% of the forecasted amount. The increased use was attributed to the higher than average temperatures during October. Poudre River diversions are average for this time of year and Colorado-Big Thompson (CBT) storage is full at more than 500,000 acre-feet (af).  A board member inquired whether CBT storage was actually at capacity and Mr. Jokerst clarified that CBT storage is full for this time of year. Halligan Water Supply Project Quarterly Update Mr. Jokerst provided the quarterly update regarding the Halligan water supply project. The Halligan Draft Environment Impact Statement (EIS) is on schedule for fall 2016. In anticipation of the EIS, the City has increased outreach recently.  A board member inquired if the board could receive a copy of the City’s memorandum to the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers. Mr. Jokerst indicated that he would provide it to the board. 2015 Update from Coalition for the Poudre River Watershed (CPRW) (Attachments available upon request) Jen Kovecses, Executive Director of the Coalition for the Poudre River Watershed, gave a presentation regarding the CPRW. Included in the presentation was how the group formed, which started during summer 2012 after fires on the Poudre watershed, and future plans of the coalition. The organization hopes to create a diverse role that focuses on watershed needs associated with post-fire rehabilitation. Eventually CPRW hopes to become more proactive and broaden their role through watershed protection, rather than rehabilitation. Highlights of the Discussion  A board member asked a question to clarify the level of effort expected of CPRW into the future. Ms. Kovecses indicated that a three- to five-year strategic plan exists and hopes the CPRW will shift into becoming more proactive. The ultimate goal is to let collaborative partners have the resources they need.  A board member sought clarification regarding the authority of the supervision of CPRW when they are onsite and performing work, especially on federal or private property. Ms. Kovecses explained that communication and appointment of a project liaison occurs, which minimizes conflict and leads to approval of designs before any work begins.  CPRW Board Chair Dick Jefferies mentioned that CPRW is an asset that allows more funds to be expended on federal lands since federal budgets are regularly reduced. Funds from U.S. Forest Service are now going to firefighting, rather than fire avoidance, which gives CPRW an opportunity to use their funds to close the shortfall—sometimes at a cheaper cost by reducing staff time. 3 Water Board Minutes November 19, 2015 2015 Annual Water Quality Update from Source Watershed Program (Attachments available upon request) Watershed Specialist Jill Oropeza gave an overview regarding the Fort Collins Utilities Source Watershed Program. Overall, 19 sites are sampled April to November on an annual basis. The program has been combined with the City of Greeley to reduce redundancies and cost. Although Fort Collins does not utilize water off of the North Fork of the Poudre River, several of those sites are included due to the agreement with Greeley. Samples are taken and evaluated for chemical, physical and biological parameters. The samples provide a snapshot over time and appear to be relatively consistent since the program began. Overall, there is low risk of regulatory exceedances of samples. The City continues to operate the Early Warning Water Quality Alert System, which prevents sedimentation in piping system. In 2015, Fort Collins entered into an agreement to share costs on Horsetooth monitoring with Northern Colorado Water Conservancy District (“Northern Water”) and determined the cost- sharing has been beneficial. The City hopes to continue the agreement into 2016. Due to the City’s charge to engage stakeholders in this process, they have partnered with CPRW to plan and overlap joint stakeholders. Highlights of the Discussion  A board member asked how close nutrient levels were to action levels. Ms. Oropeza indicated there were several orders of magnitude difference between actual results and results that would exceed regulatory levels. Underground Detention Policy Update (Attachments available upon request) Stormwater Quality Engineer Basil Hamdan of the Environmental Regulatory Affairs Division gave an overview of underground detention policies in the City. Currently, underground detention is only allowed on an exception basis and the Utilities Executive Director must approve all requests. Staff intends to streamline the approval process by amending City policy to adopt criteria that mirrors the City’s sustainability goals. The proposed policy update intends to increase storage below grade through the adoption of criteria that grants easier approval to design and construction of underground stormwater detention facilities in the City of Fort Collins. As described in the presentation, underground detention allows increase in detention of onsite runoff, without tying up additional surface area. The intent of the underground detention policy is targeted toward smaller facilities, and should not be the exclusive method of stormwater control on larger projects. To be effective, underground detention structures must be maintained in accordance with developed standard operating procedures. In order to address the maintenance requirements, the new policy will require facilities with underground detention structures to inspect their own facilities twice per year. The City will visually inspect all structures approximately every two years for proper operation. Staff feels this is an appropriate mechanism to control stormwater and wants to place into City Code. 4 Water Board Minutes November 19, 2015 Highlights of the Discussion  A board member sought clarification on the types of impervious areas that will be targeted with the policy update. Mr. Hamdan replied that it will generally be parking areas and other areas that must maximize the available surface area, without storing water above ground.  A board member inquired about the maintenance required with underground detention structures. Mr. Hamdan indicated that maintenance and operations procedures recommend cleaning and vacuuming on a six-month schedule that will be required in the new regulations.  A board member inquired if the life-cycle of underground storage structures were less than other above ground structures. It was communicated that the stability and durability of the systems is high, which allows long life spans of the structures.  Freezing and thawing is not an issue due to the design of the system and the associated porous nature of the structure and air movement.  A board member identified a concern regarding potential of system degradation due to excessive use. Staff emphasized the importance of maintenance and reiterated that maintenance standards will be built into the regulations and must be followed to ensure an effective structure.  Approximately every two years, Utilities staff will conduct a visual inspection to evaluate the effectiveness of the drainage structure. In addition, as part of the standard operating procedures, the facility must inspect their own facilities twice per year.  There have been 20 to 30 approvals of underground storage structures in recent history.  A board member sought assurances that any new policies associated with underground detention structures will be vetted through the Water Board and City Council. As described by Mr. Hamdan, all policy changes require Water Board and City Council approval. Future technical aspects can be changed administratively through Utilities staff approval.  A board member inquired if mosquitoes were a concern with underground detention structures. Due to the 72-hour detention maximum, and lack of standing water, mosquitoes are not an issue.  A board member recommended that any violations requiring corrective measures to a structure be consistent with City code. Previous corrective measures with a time stipulation have led to discussion among the Water Board in the past.  A board member recommended that the overarching guidance regarding underground storage structures be presented with the materials for ease of understanding. Board Member Brian Brown moved that the Water Board recommend City Council approve the Underground Detention Criteria Policy amendment to the Stormwater Criteria Manual. Board Member Phyllis Ortman seconded the motion. There was no discussion. Vote on the motion: The motion passed unanimously, 8-0. 5 Water Board Minutes November 19, 2015 Strategic Alignment of 2016 Work Plan (Attachments available upon request) Chairperson Steve Malers described revisions to the draft 2016 Water Board Work Plan. Water Engineering Field Operations Manager Jon Haukaas stated that the Work Plan prioritized the topics and identified approximately 25 different items that seem to be of high interest to the Water Board in 2016. Discussion Highlights  Changed “Regional Issues” to include “Regional and System-wide Issues.”  A board member recommended a topic identified on the work plan that regards cash in lieu rates and discussions of any study that is performed to support. Board members listed issues to consider for the 2016 Work Plan  Historical data and projections regarding cost of service and rate structure  Biosolid opportunities  Additional gravel pit storage  Ditch ownership, management and long-term planning  BFO process  Cash-in-lieu requirements for new water supplies  Other storage options  Michigan Ditch updates  Succession planning approach, process and tools  Asset management approach, process and tools  Oil and gas property values/human health study  Impact of Thornton’s Pipeline  Raw water acquisition policies  Succession planning for Utilities staff  City’s open data policy and Utilities data  Metrics for public water outreach, including data from advanced metering infrastructure (AMI)  Sprinkler audit and stream restoration field trip  Colorado Water Plan  Review of Utilities performance metrics Chairperson Malers stated that the 2016 Work Plan will be finalized at the December 2015 meeting. Proposed 2016 Meeting and Work Session Schedule (Attachment available upon request) Board Chairperson Steve Malers discussed the schedule for 2016 meetings. Board meetings will continue to be the third Thursday of every month and work sessions will be the first Thursday of even-numbered months. Other Business Future board size (number of board members) was discussed; no action was taken.