HomeMy WebLinkAboutNatural Resources Advisory Board - Minutes - 05/18/2016MINUTES
CITY OF FORT COLLINS
NATURAL RESOURCES ADVISORY BOARD
Date: Wednesday, May 18, 2016
Location: 215 N. Mason Conference Room 1A
Time: 6:00–8:30pm
For Reference
Bob Overbeck, Council Liaison 970-988-9337
Katy Bigner, Staff Liaison 970-221-6317
Board Members Present Board Members Absent
John Bartholow, chair Bob Mann
Katherine de Leon Nancy DuTeau
Luke Caldwell
Jay Adams
Elizabeth Hudetz
Harry Edwards
Drew Derderian
Staff Present
Katy Bigner, Staff Liaison, Environmental Services
Dianne Tjalkens, Admin/Board Support, Social Sustainability
Ralph Zentz, Senior Urban Forester, Parks
Lucinda Smith, Environmental Services Director
Jen Shanahan, Natural Resource Water Shed Specialist, Natural Areas
Ken Sampley, Water Utilities Engineering Manager
Beck Anderson, Civil Engineer I, Water Utilities Engineering
Dan Evans, Civil Engineer III, Water Utilities Engineering
Kurt Friesen, Director of Parks Planning and Development
John Stokes, Natural Areas Director
Guests:
David Tweedale, citizen
Call meeting to order: John called the meeting to order at 6:00pm
Member Comments: Upcoming event at Lory Student Center—future of water with NPR.
Public Comments: None.
Approval of Minutes:
Harry moved and Luke seconded a motion to approve the April minutes as presented.
Motion passed unanimously, 6-0-0. Jay arrived after vote.
AGENDA ITEM 1— Emerald Ash Borer Impacts and Disposal Issues
Ralph Zentz, Sr. Urban Forester, provided information on the anticipated local impacts from
1 | Page
Emerald Ash Borer and the City’s discussion on how to address disposal issues and tree
replacement.
Emerald Ash Borer is not yet in Fort Collins, but diligent in looking for it. Tiny green beetle that kills
all North American ash trees. Little difference in resistance between ash types. Ash are already
struggling along Front Range due to other factors. Asian ash trees developed with this bug. It takes
out weak trees in Asia. There are also predators in Asia. Here, it gets under bark and kills all ash trees
that get infested. Current range—Colorado is furthest west state. Fairly certain it is moving into
Texas. Is already in most of north eastern part of US. Probably came in through shipping crates in
1990s. Wasn’t detected until 2000s. Detected in Boulder in late September 2013. Because it is
invasive it comes under state and federal quarantine regulations. Boulder county and adjacent
landfills quarantined. It usually takes 3-4 years from being introduced to an area to being identified.
Quarantine is only as good as enforcement—let all residents know, seek out those who would be
moving wood, and let know illegal to move ash outside of area. Working closely with APHIS.
Colorado Dept of Agriculture initiated quarantine. Have a lot of interagency cooperation. Was
recently found in Chautauqua area. Identify infestation by D-shaped exit holes. Hatching larva feed
on wood under the bark and kill the tree (gallery of intertwining grooves). Emergence of larva starts
when weather warms up. Once larvae are in main trunk the tree will not survive. Woodpeckers can
sense the beetles—good indicator to look for ash borers when have lot of woodpecker holes. Ash has
been tough, resilient tree, so has been widely planted over last 50 years after die-off of American
Elm. City projects and new developments have been told no ash for last 10 years. Private citizens
could still buy and plant. Comprises 5-80% of community/subdivision trees. Freezing, drought, and
other pests causing issues for ash as well. Green ash has been naturalized in many areas.
Comparison to Dutch Elm: lost 200M elm, will lose 7.5B ash unless protected by chemicals. Denver
metro has 1.4M ash trees. In Fort Collins 67K ash trees (public and private)= 15%. Too high for one
species. Greeley is 30%. Each year add thousands of trees which are not ash, so percent will
decrease. Mortality doubles annually once infestation begins. Treatment options go down longer you
wait. Chemicals can successfully treat an infested tree, with less than 25% infestation. Some
chemicals will last 2-3 years. Will die if not treated with pesticides. In Detroit found that an ambient
level of pest persists, so have to continue to treat for the life of the tree.
Whole neighborhoods back east were wiped out, that had 100% ash. Insects can survive in stumps.
Material must be disposed of properly. Dead trees fall over. Ash borer trees get brittle, must be
removed quickly. Removed, chipped, and new trees planted at $400/tree to plant. Removal is $200-
$500. City can handle trees and material removal on City property, but not trees on private land.
Looking at biomass burner, digester, etc. A lot of ash on private land where people cannot afford
removal costs. Trying to figure it out. Exploring new markets for using ash wood—makes good
floors, etc. One mill here is currently sawing into lumber. Wood can move within quarantine area.
Cut wood, air dry or put in kiln to meet standards to kill pests. Bark would be removed from most.
443K trees in total inventory with appraised value of $781M. 15% of population total, but account
for 33% of canopy cover in Fort Collins—account for large portion of shade trees—large impact of
loss. Estimate $1.5M cost for City land and $20M for private for dead tree removal. Replacement for
community—$2.8M public; $21.4M private. Other costs: pesticides, wood disposal, increased water
use on non-shaded areas, other public services lacking while dealing with ash. Urban forest pulls 370
tons of carbon per year. Ash accounts for 24% of carbon sequestration. Carbon storage 8900 tons,
ash is 26% of total. Improves air quality. Avoided carbon—by providing shade keep 966 tons of
carbon from atmosphere. Reduced energy consumption due to cooling. City will be hotter when ash
are gone. Trees reduce stormwater runoff—intercept water; erosion control; wind breaks; water
quality.
Proven that well landscaped properties sell faster and have higher value. Studies before and after
complete deforestation from emerald ash borer found increased respiratory and cardio problems and
increased issues with child birth.
Ash borer will likely get to Fort Collins by someone carrying it here, though it does travel naturally.
2 | Page
Discussion/Q&A:
• Can we require nurseries disclosing that ash trees are susceptible?
o Have lots of conversations with our nurseries.
• Survival rate?
o Less than 1%. Possible extinction event.
o Other than financial cost of replacing trees, what are ecological impacts?
Will address in presentation.
• What will trees be replaced with? Native? Xeriscaping?
o Native trees are cottonwood. Tradeoffs of other shade trees. Look at other trees well
adapted to area. Honey locust is getting too high percent. Will make as wide of a
pallet as possible from species known to work here. In parks looking at more native
trees. Cottonwoods need more maintenance than other trees, highest incident of
failure, high water use.
• By grinding trees, endangering other trees?
o Grinding small enough that the borer can’t complete its lifecycle. But once in an area,
expect mortality.
o Other communities?
Many just taking care of municipally owned property trees. Fort Collins
hopefully can do better than that, at least with offering a place to bring the
wood.
Can it be added to asphalt?
• Will look into that. Some research has been done in this area.
• Check trees frequently?
o Yes. Pesticide must be injected into trunk. Tradeoffs of mature shade tree,
carbon/oxygen cycle, with use of pesticides. TREE-äge is main pesticide used. $4-5
per inch diameter to treat. Emamectin benzoate is not a neonicotinoid—it is gold
standard. Another product called Azadirachtin is made from neem tree oil. It is
$12/inch, is less effective and must be used more often. Environmentally about the
same impact.
o No one has been able to eradicate the beetle anywhere.
• Having all this ash and need to use it. Money generator? Markets? Wood can be stored long-
term.
o Market is not there right now.
o Used to try to sell tree waste for fire wood, but lost money. Working with USDA and
CSU to develop markets for ash and other urban woods.
• Cooling quality and air cleaning of the canopy—instead of planting more non-native trees,
could have solar collectors. These won’t need pesticides and maintenance that trees need.
o Trees produce oxygen and cool the atmosphere by releasing water. Good value to
having strong healthy canopy.
o Concerned about bees with use of pesticides.
• Recommending alternative species?
o Have good list on website. Our environment is rough on certain types of trees.
Experimenting with different types of elms to keep legacy alive. Have even planted
gingkoes.
• Many benefits that we lose are given back by replacement trees.
o Lifespan of a tree is pretty short, but could be 25 years before get canopy that can do
shading of current canopy. Must gain diameter before can store carbon. Planning now
(have emerald ash borer management plan) to replace small, poor ash. Stopped
planting ash 10 years ago, so other trees planted are getting larger now.
o Provide incentives for replacement trees to homeowners?
3 | Page
Pursuing that idea. Did with insect/disease that was killing black walnut.
Helps.
• Volunteer force?
o Not yet. Will take people who know trees pretty well to help. Working with master
gardeners to some degree. Would like to see more young people getting involved in
that program.
• Have all ash trees in city plotted?
o Only on City land. Community sample was based on random lots throughout the city.
Additional clarifying information received post-meeting—Ash trees are wind pollinated and do
not rely on pollinating insects, therefore they are not highly sought out by pollinators. That helps
keep exposure to pesticides used for EAB at a much smaller scale than with other tree or crop
species.
AGENDA ITEM 2— Budgeting for Outcomes Process
Lucinda Smith, Environmental Services Director, provided an overview of the City’s Budgeting for
Outcomes process for the 2017/2018 years.
City has biennial budget. Goal is to be transparent about funding choices. Offers are written for
programs—“core” offers for standard programs, “enhancements” for new ideas. Have seven outcome
areas that align with City Strategic Plan. BFO teams consists of 7 staff and 2 citizens each. They
spend about 2 months reviewing offers for funding. Public and boards get to weigh in. Product goes
to Budget Lead Team who review recommendations and publish the City Manager’s recommended
budget. City Council has several Work Sessions, then two readings to adopt the budget.
Macro Considerations: healthy revenue (not surplus), some support for one-time expenditures, expect
slowdown in revenue growth, in building projects permit volume is high but value is down, all four
utilities have upcoming infrastructure needs (different funding pool), several large on-going needs,
CAP needs are putting pressure on rates and general funds.
Ongoing Expenses Assumptions: salary cost of living adjustment for staff, benefits cost increase with
affordable care act, history of hiring people into hourly positions who should now be converted to
classified positions, I-25 funding and CAP funding.
Strategic Plan identifies objectives for seven outcome area. BFO offers must show how will support
these objectives. Environmental Health includes zero waste, resiliency and adaptation, expansion of
urban wildlife and ecosystems, achieving CAP goals, long term water storage, etc. Have strategy
maps that identify 3-4 metrics per objective to give report card on progress. Some metrics
information is available on the community dashboard on the website; more to come. Environmental
health has core and enhancement offers around wastewater, energy efficiency/renewables, Natural
Areas, ESD, Nature in the City, and others.
ESD enhancement offers include municipal resiliency and adaptation planning, community resiliency
and adaptation planning, FortZED support, CAP innovation fund, EV readiness, CAP program
assistant, City energy project (applying to Institute for Market Transportation for matching funds to
reduce energy use in commercial buildings), and CAP general fund.
Enhancement offers are for indoor air quality programs, Timberline recycling center, sustainable
materials management, expanding municipal innovation fund, leading by example strategies for
municipal sustainability, local food coordinator, and conversion of municipal lawn and garden
equipment away from fossil fuels. Total of 97 CAP related offers throughout the City. The
community advisory committee will look at 31 of these. Big offers in energy efficiency and clean
energy, smaller offers in multimodal planning and development, etc.
Superboard meeting June 1 on BFO offers. Can read more information on website.
4 | Page
Discussion/Q&A:
• This board has had difficult time understanding when is the best time to weigh in and what
input is best. In past have looked at shortened versions of environmental health related offers
and put together memo. Unsure of benefit of this work. Guidance?
o There is a public comment period on offers. Can provide a list of ones specific to
CAP. Ecosystem services will probably fall under environmental health as well.
o Can find out plan for public engagement from Lawrence. Expect there will be a way
to read shortened versions and vote online.
o Board has never identified offers to not fund.
o Energy Board has made that type of recommendation. There is only so much money
and this type of input is helpful.
o Considered setting up priority scheme?
That’s what budget teams process does. Have a 1-10 scale.
That part doesn’t come through to what is presented to boards.
BFO teams develop prioritization and public input influences ranking. Board
can do similar process.
Suggest attending Superboard meeting.
• Public outreach—last time only found out about this through a friend. Is it on Facebook, etc.?
Is someone in charge of media releases?
o There is someone. Teams just started at the beginning of May. The City has not
started seeking input from the public on BFO yet.
o And on energy efficiency?
Many social media accounts and Enviro portal (one-stop shop for programs).
• Explain “offer”?
o Lucinda provided examples of first page of an offer.
o It is how bundle programs, projects and services. Ex: ESD core offer has salaries, and
other expenses. City Council is “buyer” and those submitting offers are “sellers.”
ACTION ITEMS: Find out plan for public engagement from Lawrence.
AGENDA ITEM 3—Poudre River Policies and 2013 Flood Recovery Projects
Panel discussion of Poudre River vision, policies, programs and coordination between Natural
Areas, Parks and Stormwater facilitated by John Stokes, Natural Areas Director, Ken Sampley,
Water Utilities Engineering Manager and Kurt Friesen, Director of Parks Planning and
Development. Ken also provided information and addressed questions regarding the 2013 Flood
Recovery Project on the Poudre River near Spring Creek just upstream of Prospect Road.
Big Picture
Please refer to PowerPoint Presentation. The Poudre River has changed a lot over time. Horizontal
migration and changes in bed elevation occur due to a combination of natural morphology and
manmade changes. Amenity to the city, water supply, stormwater quality, recreation, health and
wellness, trail system, river ecology, floodplain management, life-safety and property, etc.
City Strategic Plan Objectives
Improve and protect habitat and ecosystems, and protect life and property with natural, aesthetically
pleasing flood mitigation; maintain and enhance current culture, recreation and parks system; plan
and develop communitywide education.
Interdepartmental Coordination
• Poudre River Health Assessment—created framework to understand condition of river.
Doing condition assessment this year to create global report card for the river.
• Downtown Poudre River Project—working with Kurt and his staff to put in kayak park and
other improvements—access, parking, trails, etc. Improving river health, floodplain, safe fish
5 | Page
passage, family friendly, etc. Stormwater assisted financially. Can narrow floodplain in that
area with improvements and increase safety.
• Poudre River Stormwater Master Plan—protection, erosion, sedimentation, public safety,
other improvements from stormwater perspective.
• McMurry Natural Area Restoration—Natural Areas completed this project. Natural Areas
owns about 75% of floodplain on river. Allowing river to overbank and flood in some natural
areas. Will continue to do projects like this when possible. Drops sediment, nourishes
wetland plants and trees, and regenerates cottonwood trees. River has been high the last few
years.
• 2013 Flood Recovery Projects (Spring Creek at Poudre) – See later discussion.
• Poudre Capacity at Oxbow Levee—river hydrology and hydraulics is being reevaluated
because mapping was old, changes in vegetation growth, etc. Found that Oxbow Levee
certification is compromised due to inadequate freeboard. Need to increase flow conveyance
and also raise top of levee in some areas.
Programs, Projects and Philosophies
• Risk=Probability*Consequence. Ex: medium consequence of bike path erosion (public may not
want cost of bike path changes), but if river were to keep eroding in that direction, consequence
becomes damage to buildings.
• Spectrum of Consideration: The river used to migrate across the plain, but it has been altered by
human activity. When river migrates across floodplain, the ecosystem dependent on that
movement thrives. Option to allow limited movement increases ecological function, but also
increases risk. Hard to allow in urban areas. Can allow for multithread channel in some areas—
many benefits such as generation of native trees. Another level is allowing overbanking in some
areas of floodplain.
Can get good outcomes with stabilized banks. Bioengineering—using plants to stabilize,
hardened banks. Poudre River Master Plan will have prioritization. Approach is fewer levees and
hardening stream bank locations than in original Master Plan. Will have fewer erosion sites. Will
look at alternatives for each site to determine appropriate levels for balancing migration with
stabilization.
Limited Pallet of Options: The river is anchored at bridges, development, and underground
infrastructure. Numerous pipelines go under the river. These constrain options.
Spring Creek at Poudre River
Initial damage in 2013 flood event, additional damage in 2014 spring runoff. 2015 spring runoff at
4,200 cfs (cubic feet per second). Infrastructure at risk was trail system, Prospect Road, commercial
buildings, and underground utilities. Public safety concern—outdoor activities of Mountain Sage
school. Aerial photographs showed significant lateral migration of the river between 1937 and 2013.
Project Goals: Mitigate further lateral migration, prevent vertical bank erosion, and provide for
public safety. Coordinated with Parks and Natural Areas on design concepts. Partnered with Parks to
stabilize bank upstream. Used riprap and willow staking. This project resulted in a change in the
TRM—(turf reinforcement matting) methods used for stabilizing seeded areas. The new TRM
consists of coconut husk, biodegradable, matting to hold seeds in place through germination. This is
much more expensive but provides less risk of wildlife entrapment in netting. Successful project.
With 2013 floods, this discussion happening across Front Range. Fort Collins wasn’t as greatly
impacted. High functioning government. Integrating Stormwater and Natural Areas. Turning a corner
in considering many more options. It was noted that in Europe rivers have been 100% channelized
and they are now dealing with consequences. States in the western US never got to that point.
Primary focus of Natural Areas was for land acquisition, open space, and recreation, but also helped
to keep a lot of development out of floodplain. Work well together. Staff agreed that we cannot
completely restore the river. Can rehabilitate only.
6 | Page
Discussion/Q&A:
• Can staff design new bridges to allow fewer constraints of the river?
o River can be 1-2 miles wide. Economics of making bridges larger. TBL analysis.
Have changed philosophies over years, but there is a lot in place that is limiting.
o Woodward headquarters site was completely redone—engineered to meet floodplain
related needs. Gave river room to move, but have buried riprap to prevent it going to
Lemay.
o Mulberry Bridge got a lot bigger. Lincoln Bridge is constrained by development.
o Riprap is usually large rock. Doesn’t move under pressure of water. There is still
some risk that even these structures can get washed out.
• Policies/criteria for various options?
o There is no specific policy that says we are to “let the river go.” There is no specific
itemized list of criteria. It is a project-by-project look to see what can be done.
Example: Lyons Park—reinforced the why for more engineered approaches.
• Future modelling, strategic thinking. As there is more development and impervious surfaces
increase, loss of ash trees, other water retention like NISP, do you look at these and climate
models? Is risk of flooding going to be increasing/decreasing? How do you account for
these?
o These things all contribute to uncertainties in dealing with the river. Some we cannot
plan around. Some we can factor into thinking. Restoration projects consider how
much water will be in river if NISP is built. Complicated/dynamic/unpredictable.
Have had unprecedented high river level for 3 years which makes bank stabilization
difficult. Have had to do repairs. 1905 biggest flood on Poudre—25,000 cfs, while
2013 was 10,000 cfs.
o Seaman Reservoir was completely filled during 2013 flood which benefitted the
Poudre with lower peak discharges.
• NRAB had a presentation recently on water supply storage and wondered why can’t we
interconnect small ponds to create more storage.
o Challenge is to make it efficient and cost effective, plus various management
techniques for reservoirs including treatment, return flow, augmentation issues.
Unlikely to be able to interconnect them. Not financially viable solution.
o At certain flood levels the river will go into those ponds.
o Looking for areas for storage.
o Ponds Martin Marietta has are water storage for tri-districts.
For return flows/water rights. Not used for drinking water. Other ponds not
lined and groundwater is running through them. Not enough storage in them
to make economically viable to line them.
For storage need deep walls to seal ponds.
What is it used for?
• Habitat.
• Would get good public feedback if they were stocked with fish.
o They are stocked.
• In Loveland the lake is almost dry. Why?
o That is a water storage pond owned by Greeley Loveland irrigation—water goes to
Horseshoe and Boyd. Depending on where they are on filling things, the water
fluctuates. Neighbors own water rights, so try to keep the level fairly high. If working
on something downstream can change level in lake.
• Goal is for staff to focus on how the river can do its own work. Want to make sure it doesn’t
get too small for when a large flood event happens. Ecosystem knows how to manage for
large events. Recognize what we can do to maintain channel capacity. Importance of
understanding natural systems.
7 | Page
AGENDA ITEM 4—Other Business
Open Board Discussion/Announcements
• Elizabeth: Helped pass moratorium on fracking in 2013. Working with Colorado Citizens’
Rights network to get initiative on ballot for all municipalities in state to have home rule,
which would prevent municipalities from being sued by interested companies.
Agenda Planning/Review City Council’s 6-Month Planning Calendar/NRAB Action Items
• Save the Poudre. Nothing new until EIS comes out.
• New NISP proposal for June agenda.
• Dark Skies and Community Recycling Ordinance changes on June agenda.
• June 1 Superboard meeting on BFO.
• Water collaboration workshop May 31
Meeting Adjourned: 8:37pm
Next Meeting: June 15
8 | Page