HomeMy WebLinkAboutNatural Resources Advisory Board - Minutes - 04/19/20171 | Page
MINUTES
CITY OF FORT COLLINS
NATURAL RESOURCES ADVISORY BOARD
Date: Wednesday, April 19, 2017
Location: Colorado River Room, 222 Laporte Avenue
Time: 6:00–8:00pm
For Reference
Bob Overbeck, Council Liaison 970-988-9337
Katy Bigner, Staff Liaison 970-221-6317
Board Members Present Board Members Absent
Jay Adams John Bartholow
Nancy DuTeau, Chair Bob Mann
Elizabeth Hudetz
Luke Caldwell, Vice Chair
Drew Derderian
Ling Wang
Katherine de Leon
Staff Present
Katy Bigner, Staff Liaison, Environmental Services
Donnie Dustin, Fort Collins Utilities Water Resources Manager
Lance Smith, Fort Collins Utilities Strategic Finance Director
Honoré Depew, Environmental Planner
Victoria Shaw, Senior Financial Analyst
Guests:
David Tweedale, Land Conservation and Stewardship Board
Tucker Cunningham, CSU Student
Trevor Donnelly, EnergyLogic, Inc.
Call meeting to order: 6:03 pm
Agenda Review: No changes
Public Comments: None
Approval of Minutes:
Elizabeth moved and Luke seconded a motion to approve the March minutes as presented.
Motion passed unanimously, 7-0-0
AGENDA ITEM 1— Changes to Raw Water Requirements
Donnie Dustin, Water Resources Manager for Fort Collins Utilities, presented proposed changes to
the current Raw Water Requirement (RWR) system and associated Cash-in-Lieu (CIL) rate, which
are needed to ensure that the impacts of new development will be offset and that the City will have
adequate water supplies and infrastructure. These changes were presented to City Council at their
2 | Page
February 14, 2017 work session and will be taken back for adoption in the coming months following
additional public outreach.
Donnie provided a breakdown of Fort Collins Utilities (FCU) water fees. Raw Water Requirements
(RWR) are fees paid by new developments for water usage, and are based on usage and type of
development. The goal of RWR is to generate adequate funds and water rights. Donnie presented a
graph titled “Colorado-Big Thompson (CBT) Project Unit Price vs. Fort Collins Utilities Usage,”
which showed that in past 3-4 years, costs of water have skyrocketed, while the average water use
per capita has decreased. Changes being recommended by FCU: 1) Amount of RWR. This
depends on the growth rate of Fort Collins. FCU analyzed 2006-2015 water usage, and it was less
than expected. Single family home usage was 26% less, and multifamily 39% less. 2) Cash-in-lieu
(CIL) rates, based on a Hybrid approach. Firm yield is the amount of water available during
drought. Increasing firm yield for new development will cost around $130 million ($64 million for
infrastructure, $25.5 million for future water rights, and $40.5 million from existing portfolio). This
future investment divided by the increased firm yield equals FCU’s proposed CIL rate of $16,700 per
acre-foot of RWR. The CIL rate is currently $6,500 per acre-foot. A specialist in rate fees calculated
that FCU’s existing portfolio is worth $33,800 per acre-foot. Even with the price increase, the cost
would be much lower than adjacent water districts. 4) Cash Only System. Cash allows flexibility;
FCU would be able to buy shares, purchase storage, participate in regional projects, and more. 5)
Changing the name “Raw Water Requirements” to “Water Supply Requirements.”
Options for implementation: Adopt and implement changes immediately, adopt changes and delay
implementation by 6-12 months, or adopt changes and phase implementation over 1-2 years.
Next steps: Continue discussion with water districts, continue outreach to boards and commissions,
meet with Council on August 15 and September 10, and make changes effective 2018.
Affordable Housing Board is considering putting a recommendation together for Council.
Discussion/Q&A:
• Would Plant Investment Fees include conservation programs?
o Conservation related dollars come out of rate related payments.
• Are HOAs included in the residential category?
o Depends on buildings, lots, and the irrigation tap in each area. Some HOAs use a
commercial tap.
• Is CBT a reusable source of water?
o No. Although it is trans-mountain water (which usually can be fully consumed or
“reused”), CBT is not a reusable source because of how that federal project was set up.
• Will this impact the types of residential development in the future?
o Not necessarily as a result of these changes. The planning department projects that many
single family areas will be converted to multi-use.
• Is the cost increase because we haven’t been charging a market rate, and have no reserve?
o No, this is an impact fee. Charge up to 100% of fee; FCU has been undercharging
recently.
• Where is the water storage? Underground aquifers?
o Reservoirs, which can include underground aquifers. The Halligan Water Supply project
is considering the enlargement of Halligan Reservoir, as well as existing agricultural
storage, gravel pits along the river, and expanding Glade reservoir if NISP (Northern
Integrated Supply Project) goes through.
• Could you interconnect the gravel pits along the river to create more storage?
o Those would contain exposed, untreated groundwater. Not feasible for FCU use.
• Are environmental costs taken into account?
o To a certain extent. Mitigation costs only considered with the Halligan project.
• Equity buy-in is a good idea because current customers were purchasing more water than they
actually used. It would pay back existing customers for good conservation.
• Is there worry about increased water usage by the growing population?
3 | Page
o There was concern about “drought rebound,” but Fort Collins has a strong water
conservation program and financial incentives.
• Is there any monitoring of outdoor water use?
o Advanced metering infrastructure for monitoring leaks. Wasting Water Hotline: 970-416-
2881
ACTION ITEMS: Donnie will send Katy an updated presentation with the NRAB name on it; Katy
will send the presentation to the Board.
AGENDA ITEM 2— Community Recycling Ordinance and Organic Update
Honoré Depew, Environmental Planner, provided an update on the Community Organics Recycling
Project (CORP). Staff will be going to a City Council Work Session on May 23rd and is seeking
feedback prior to that meeting.
Community Organics Recycling Project (CORP) is a new project that has stemmed out of the
Community Recycling Ordinance (CRO). Over ¾ of what ends up at the Larimer County Landfill is
recoverable through composting or recycling. The CRO updated rules for trash and recycling
collection; it was unanimously approved by Council in September 2016. Council delayed a decision
on organics and asked for a more in-depth analysis. CORP decision points include: should organics
collection be mandatory or voluntary, should collection be for yard trimmings only or yard trimmings
and food scraps combined, and where should the end destination for materials be? Current
operational end destinations: A1 Organics in Eaton or Keenesburg. Theoretical options: Transfer
station in Larimer County, new regional/local composting facility, Drake Water Reclamation
Facility, Heartland Biodigester (if re-opened). Financial modeling evaluated cost inputs and variables
and estimated monthly impacts for the tons of material composted, greenhouse gas reductions,
potential cost, and jobs created. Residential results included bundled or opt-in options for yard
trimmings and yard plus food collection. The model showed that the more material is diverted, the
cheaper the cost per ton diverted. For restaurants, they are working on converting numbers to
percentages because it would be more meaningful than dollar amounts. Only 2-3 additional pick-up
routes would be required to pick up food scraps semi-weekly from restaurants. Developing a food
waste reduction education campaign. Potential branding could be “Save Your Food” or “Food Too
Good to Waste.” Changing where our waste goes does not solve the root problem: about ¼ of the
average American’s food is wasted.
Next steps: Continue to refine analysis, continue outreach to boards and commissions, public meeting
on May 2, Council work session on May 23.
Discussion/Q&A:
• Data on residential food scraps measured in weight or volume?
o Weight. 23% of residential waste is food. It is difficult to have people separate food into a
different bin. Comingled recycling was successful because people didn’t need to separate.
• Which end location showed the most greenhouse gas reduction?
o Of the facilities that are constructed, Heartland. For composting, Larimer. For residential,
Drake.
• Can any of those potential future landfill sites have composting, too?
o Potentially the site north of Wellington. Compost facilities are challenging to site.
• Mandatory yard and food collection might lead to compost being collected bi-weekly in the long
term.
o Downsizing containers could be a more feasible option. We would need to gradually
transition to bi-weekly, and the startup cost may be high.
• Someone would need to supply a food waste bin of some sort?
o We considered the cost of adding bins for residential and restaurants in the modeling.
• Have you considered having grocers act as a drop off station for food scraps?
o No, but that is a good idea.
4 | Page
• Another idea is residents getting unused compost back for a fee.
• Will the improved CDPHE regulations allow for more recycling facilities?
o Integrated Solid Waste and Materials Management Plan analyzed the entire Front Range
and provided geographical recommendations. There are stronger calls for unified
statewide recycling goals.
• Will there be continued promotion for composting at home?
o To a certain degree. Staff resources and funding need to be directed strategically.
AGENDA ITEM 3— Drafting of Ditch Related Questions for City Staff
As follow up to previous discussions, NRAB members will draft questions specific to ditch
management and the role of the City for response by staff.
Luke said he would like to consolidate all questions and send them to Katy. He said ditch companies
are not very forthcoming, and water laws are complicated. Ditches are engrained all across Fort
Collins and have a potential impact on all of us. And yet, we don’t know much about them. What is
the relationship between the ditch companies and the City?
Questions Generated:
• Does the City have a contract with all ditch companies? If so, where can we find them?
• Do we get water from them? How much?
• What are the water rights? Is the City a prominent stakeholder? North Poudre Irrigation
Company?
• What regulations do they operate under? It is private property, but are there guidelines?
• How have citizen-ditch company conflicts been handled in the past?
• Are there code enforcements and legal obligations of the companies?
• Are there codes for them starting fires in their ditches? Is the fire department notified? What
happens when the fire causes damages?
• Could ditch easements be used for connections of trails/bike lanes? What is the liability?
• How do the ditches fit in with the connectivity and wildlife maps of Nature in the City?
• Trash buildup—is there risk of flooding from clogging?
ACTION ITEM: Luke will create a synopsis of the questions and send them out to the Board.
AGENDA ITEM 4— Updates and Announcements
• Luke attended the Bicycle Advisory Committee meeting and saw a presentation on the City’s
bike education efforts—the NRAB may benefit from seeing the presentation.
• May meeting: Lindsay Ex is currently scheduled to provide climate action
• May 12–13: Council retreat
• Raw Water recommendation to Council
o Katy advised the NRAB not send a recommendation yet.
ACTION ITEM: Nancy will begin drafting the NRAB’s Raw Water recommendation to Council.
Meeting Adjourned: 8:31 pm
Next Meeting: May 17, 2017