Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutNatural Resources Advisory Board - Minutes - 07/02/2003MINUTES CITY OF FORT COLLINS NATURAL RESOURCES ADVISORY BOARD REGULAR MEETING 281 N. COLLEGE July 2, 2003 For Reference: Randy Fischer, NRAB Chair - 226-5383 Eric Hamrick, Council Liaison - 225-2343 John Stokes, Staff Liaison - 221-6263 Board Members Present Kelly Ohlson, Linda Knowlton, Phil Murphy, Ryan Staychock, Randy Fischer, Nate Donovan Board Members Absent Arvind Panjabi, Sam Otero Staff Present Natural Resources Dent: Mark Sears, Terry Klahn, John Stokes Advance Planning: Ken Waido CPES: Greg Byrne Transportation Planning: Mark Jackson Guests Helen Johnson, CSU Alexander deRoode, CSU Rick Riddock, CSU Councilperson Eric Hamrick Meegan Flenniken, Larimer County Janna McKenzie, EDAW Randy Fischer introduced new NRAB member, Ryan Staychock. Ryan is from New York, and is currently a graduate student at CSU. Agenda Review No changes to the agenda. Kelly Ohlson has a few items to discuss under new business. Review and Approval of Minutes: June 4, 2003 The minutes of the June 4, 2003 meeting were unanimously approved as written. Natural Resources Advisory Board July 2, 2003 Page 2 of 7 Larimer County — Fossil Creek Regional Open Space Preliminary Development Plans (Meegan Flenniken) Flenniken said this is intended to provide an update on the Fossil Creek Plan that has already been adopted. We'll be looking at design and features, and review the resource management plan. The plan maintains a similar arrangement as to what was shown before. We're trying to maintain separation from the road, while making it as efficient as possible. The loop trail has changed a bit to keep it out of the buffer. • Ohlson: What is the trail that's closed in the winter made of? • Savage: It will probably be a soft surface trail. The loop trail is fully ADA accessible. • Ohlson: The soft trail enhances the experience for most people. It feels like you're on a path instead of a street. • Savage: It's intended to be a slow speed trail. • Ohlson: Why 40 cars in the parking lot? That seems high to me. • Savage: The need has always been estimated at 35-50. We want to make sure it's comparable with other trail heads in the area. • Ohlson: It's not comparable with other trails heads. • Savage: You'd never build less than twenty spaces. • Sears: We anticipate this will be a heavily used site. We anticipate several times when it will be completely filled. • Knowlton: I would think more people will drive there and park then there are at Coyote Ridge. You get a much different user at Coyote Ridge. • Sears: If it gets to the point where there's a need for overflow we'll develop a gravel shoulder along the road. • Ohlson: Historically this organization will overbuild. I don't want to over build for a variety of reasons, but if you guys are real comfortable with that number, I'm ok. • Flenniken: We look at the carrying capacity of the area. Forty is reasonable, especially considering the proximity to I-25. It's not intended to be a rest stop , but it might get some use. Forty seems like a good middle range. • Savage: The building is conceptual. We don't want the building to be the focal point of the site. We want to provide a place that's comfortable for kids. We'll try to keep the maintenance area and access in the back. The intent is for it to look as native as we can make it. We're doing what we can to screen with native plants. • Knowlton: Since there is a ranger office, will there be a ranger on site some of the time, or most of the time? • Flenniken: The intent is to have an on site ranger or manager. • Ohlson: The building I like to use as an example is the Lory State Park building. I'm not talking about size or design, but the feel of it. It's a beautiful building, and the State doesn't have much money. This one doesn't seem that attractive. • Savage: We haven't talked about materials. We want it to blend in. We do have to be concerned about budget, and maintenance, and those kinds of things. Our goal is to do the best we can. • Donovan: Who will be involved in coming up with the design? Natural Resources Advisory Board July 2, 2003 Page 3 of 7 • Savage: There are no plans for a public charette. We have our architect, and we'll go back to the open lands board. Karen will get any information. • Fischer: I think I'd prefer something more in a prairie style architecture. You need t make sure the architect knows they're working for you. • Savage: They're sensitive to working with us. • McKenzie: That's the challenge, how much detail to add, and still have it blend into the fairly open landscape. • Donovan: Budget will be an issue. • McKenzie: It would be wonderful if we had 3 times the budget. We'll end up with conventional , but thoughtful construction. • Ohlson: Who is paying for the building? • Sears: It's 50150 between the City and County. • Ohlson: If an extra, say $60,000, would make the building last longer, than I would hope a request would come to the City. The City could always say no that wont work for us, or yes, we can help out. • Sears: We hear that. We're not going to build something to fit the budget and make silly decisions. We're not going to compromise quality because of the budget. • Fischer: How will the trail closures work? What kinds of physical barriers will go into them? How will they be effective? • Savage: That will be a challenge. We don't want to fence them.. How do we make it work, and keep people out? • McKenzie: It's like Coyote Ridge. People who really want to do it will go around. Hopefully the onsite management will help, as well as signage. • Ohlson: This whole thing, the City and County working together, has been the best I've seen. • Fischer: I agree. Transportation Master Plan, Mark Jackson Jackson said there are two plans to discuss, the Transportation Master Plan, and City Plan update. Tonight we're mainly working on transportation goals, principals and policies. I would like additional time at the August or September meeting. We're shooting for a September 16 adoption date for the plan. The Transportation Master Plan has been delayed, it was originally set for adoption in July. But, it didn't feel right to be out in front of City Plan. • Ohlson: I've been led to believe that on the Transportation Board, which has every perspective of the community, has had a lot of differences with the plan. Is that true? • Jackson: The difference is true, the topic is not. It's specific to the I-25 Subarea Plan. • Ohlson: So their main concerns are with parts of the I-25 Subarea Plan, and how it related to City Plan? • Jackson: The biggest issue is the notion of showing infrastructure improvements that lay outside the Growth Management Boundary. They're only shown for context purposes. Their concerns as I understand them, are it will lead people to believe that the City of Fort Collins will financially participate in those improvements. That's a Natural Resources Advisory Board July 2, 2003 Page 4 of 7 big thing, some people are real sensitive. I don't want to send the wrong message. I feel confident they're comfortable with this document. • Hamrick: I didn't hear objections raised to the goals, principals and policies. • Knowlton: I have a comment to the subarea plan, as it affects the master street plan. The words on page 27, interchange improvements are the responsibility of CDOT, however; development pressures would be required to contribute funds. • Jackson: Street oversizing pays proportionately. • Byrne: CDOT knows they're responsible for capital improvements, but will move things up if there is private matching money. • Jackson: We're doing a forecast model analysis, and taking a fresh look at the transportation vision network. We'll see how they perform given the new demographics. For a municipality we have the best model in the state. We've been working on a master list of projects to achieve various visions in the community. • Donovan: When can we see Chapter 6? • Jackson: Maybe August, but probably September. I would hope that you'll have comments on it. That's why this project is taking so long. It's a living document • Ohlson: What is the rush on this? • Jackson: No one on the team is interested in a sub -par project. If it's the right thing to slow it down again we'll talk about it. Right now it's a self imposed deadline. We've delayed it a couple times, we don't want to keep stretching it out. • Murphy: On page 1, how will you define "safe, convenient, and efficient" in a goal statement? • Jackson: You're right, that statement is value laden. • Ohlson: Why aren't all of the transportation systems deserving of their own goal? There haven't been major air quality improvements in vehicles since that last big change in terms of emissions. The statement to improve air quality is a nice goal, but it's completely false. To say we're going to improve air quality isn't being honest with the citizens. It's not going to happen. • Ohlson: At the beginning of Chapter 6 — wildlife should be it's own category. Wildlife is dramatically affected by transportation projects. • Murphy: On page 3, what is a productive based transit service? • Jackson: It's a shift in the philosophy of the City. Before we had adopted a philosophy of mass coverage. It doesn't end up being an efficient way to build a system. They've moved toward a productivity system. It focuses on productive routes, and you build out from there. It's not the most popular decision in the world, but it enables us to put more resources on our productive routes. • Knowlton: It does not say the City will not participate with tax dollars. I wanted stronger language to close the door, saying the City will not contribute to these. • Jackson: We're hearing the concern. • Knowlton: The board needs to understand that those characteristics don't appear in the City Plan. These principals and goals are formulated to reflect what you see here. • Hamrick: From my perspective, it would be good to see those characteristics, and I probably won't be alone in that. I understand it won't be the exact wording. Natural Resources Advisory Board July 2, 2003 Page 5 of 7 • Donovan: I'm concerned about consistency. We had input on those characteristics. We wont review every policy document. How is the continuity of the process maintained? • Donovan: On page 6 in bold letters in the middle of the page, it says, where feasible, does that mean dollars, or design constraints? • Jackson: When you're doing a vision, it's design constraints. • Ohlson: I've hears that there are three different City employees that deal with bike issues, is that true? • Jackson: Not in Transportation Planning. Most of those folks are in SmartTrips. I don't know if they wear different hats. • Ohlson: I would like to know. • Bryne: What you're asking for is more global than the City, you might want the MPO too. • Ohlson: All of it would be good. How many FTE go to bike stuff. • Donovan: On page 8 where it says to "pursue available long term funding", is that to deemphasize one time funding? • Jackson: That comes from the Transportation Board. A big issue is finding a consistent funding source so we're not doing capital projects by beauty contest. • Donovan: I would like to see what the community commercial district looks like on a map. • Donovan: Can we get Chapter 6 in a draft form when it's done? • Fischer: In the CAC there was some movement of staff to use a different metric than VMT as a performance thing for our street system. • Jackson: We've talked before that people are concerned we're going to do away with VMT as a trigger. I don't think that's necessarily the case. We've tweaked the language. There has been discussion with air quality staff. What we are seeing around the country is that vmt is not equal to the rate of population growth. It's not uncommon for VMT to surpass population growth. This reflects different things. We need to determine if we are driving more in Fort Collins, or are more people driving in Fort Collins. Jackson will return to the NRAB on August 6, or September 3. Board Action on I-25 Subarea Plan, Ken Waido Waido said this was originally scheduled to go to Council on July 15, but has been changed to August 19. • Ohlson: My understanding is that the AQAB has voted for Council to not adopt this, and that the Transportation Board voted 6/0 to recommend denial of the plan, and that the P&Z Board voted in support. • Fischer: Is this version pretty much the same as what we've seen before, and we shouldn't expect to see any real changes? • Waido: We're incorporating some of the wording changes. Natural Resources Advisory Board July 2, 2003 Page 6 of 7 • Ohlson: I'm in support of Randy's memo. I couldn't support the I-25 Subarea plan as it's currently presented for the reasons stated in the memo. Arvind asked why we do things to encourage the destruction of the things we're charged to protect. • Knowlton: On page 16, it talks about the I-25 subarea plan goals and references they're from City Plan. Are these the goals in the current '97 version? • Waido: They will be supplemental to the ones in City Plan • Knowlton: So, these are not in the City Plan document now? • Waido: Not in these terms. • Knowlton: Isn't it possible that updates to City Plan could affect this? • Waido: I don't think so. • Fischer: Your point is well taken. One of the major things I brought out in my memo is the characteristic of Boxelder Creek. It doesn't exist in this plan. I would like to see additional work for addressing the intent of that characteristic. • Waido: I cant respond to that, I haven't seen the memo. When they were adopted I organized a couple staff meetings. There was another meeting that looked at the broader range of open space. We considered Boxelder. The meetings were attended by storm drainage and open lands people from the City, and Council. They're the experts, and said the focus needs to be on the creek itself, and not with overspill and overflow flood plain. I was told there was nothing significant and there's no reason for special attention. Based on that feedback there was not a need to amend the subarea plan in relationship to that particular characteristic. • Knowlton: You say that with development in the subarea planning area there are needs for more infrastructure. Will that be included, with some estimate of the costs of the facilities? • Waido: We can provide some of that. Our position is that most are covered by the impact system. • Fischer: We need to focus on our recommendation. I assume our comments tonight won't influence the direction of the plan. • Ohslon: It might not affect the plan, but we advise Council. Our recommendation could influence the Council vote. This is not a slam dunk. Nate Donovan made the following motion: Move that the Natural Resources Advisory Board recommend that Council not adopt the I-25 Subarea Plan as presented by staff. The motion was seconded by Phil Murphy. Murphy: I looked at your memo and they're all good points. We need to get more into the natural resources background of these points. Donovan: I don't see how an 80' setback promotes the view shed. I think that's a community value. Waido: The 80' comes from the Harmony Corridor. We're trying to balance community goals, and allowing a reasonable amount of the ground to be developed. Natural Resources Advisory Board July 2, 2003 Page 7 of 7 Fischer: I went through this pretty carefully. We've seen enough examples of how the standards don't protect anything at all. It can all be waived without any input from this board on specific development proposals. Right now we cant comment on specific development proposals. That's a major obstacle to the protection of natural features. It seems this plan relies heavily on the Land Use Code for the protection of natural features in the corridor, that's a major deficiency. The motion passed unanimously — 6/0. New Business • Ohlson mentioned how helpful the "Monthly Feedback" was, and hopes it will continue. • Ohslon: Mark said that the County fixed Cathy Fromme Prairie, but I'd like to know how they fixed it, and does it meet City standards. • Ohlson: Ron Mills, and the new person, Kimball have left the Real Estate office. • Ohlson: The board asked staff to talk to folks at the Hort Center, and look at ways we could partner with them for plantings and the Education Center. Has that been done? • Donovan: What is the tall fence going in along Taft Hill? • Ohlson: When the water district got an easement we talked about fire hydrants, tall pipes, and blue stakes. This has been about nine months ago. • Bryne: Mark wrote one letter, and then wrote a second letter to the district. He has also made a phone call. We'll give you more detail at the next meeting. • Donovan: I understood there was communication with the district. • Ohlson: Was the pink rip -rap at the Hort Center buried. • Ryan Staychock will be unable to attend the August meeting. • Stokes: Staff is working on a revision to the NAPP. The important chapter is the land conservation portion of the plan. Hopefully we'll have a rough draft next week that we can mail to you. • Murphy: Larimer County has begun taking the #7 mix. Future Agenda Items August 6, 2003: Water Supply & Demand Mgmt Update Electric Conservation Strategic Plan, Adjourn The meeting was adjourned at 8:58 p.m. Submitted