Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutWater Board - Minutes - 09/24/2001City Council Liaison Water Board Chairman Water Board Vice Chairman Chuck Wanner Tom Sanders - 491-5448 John Morris - 491-0185 Staff Liaison Secretary DeEtta Carr - 221-6702 Kim Vondy - 221-6383 ROLL CALL Board Present Tom Sanders -Chairman, John Morris -Vice Chairman, Ted Borstad, David Lauer, Bill Fischer, Rami Naddy, Thomas Brown, Robert Ward Staff Present Dennis Bode, Wendy Williams, Dave Agee, Marsha Hilmes-Robinson, Gene Schleiger, Susan Smolnik, Brian Janonis, Steve Comstock, Kevin Gertig, Bob Smith, Kim Vondy and DeEtta Carr City Attorney Present Carrie Daggett, Assistant City Attorney Guests Present Gene Schleiger, Northern Colorado Water Conservancy District - Douglas Yadon, Short Elliott Hendrickson, Inc., A.O. Jakubauskas and Curt Amason Board Absent Paul Clopper, Joe Bergquist, David Frick MEETING OPENED/ROLL CALL Chairman Tom Sanders opened the meeting. The following items were discussed: MINUTES APPROVED Bill Fischer made a motion to approve the minutes. Rami Naddy seconded the motion. The minutes were approved unanimously. Gene Schleiger reported that Pleasant Valley Pipeline appears to be at a standstill. The issue is hung up with Fish and Wildlife Service because of the endangered species issues -- especially since the Western Slope threatened litigation on CBT operations. Fish and Wildlife Service is not willing to act and since the September 11 tragedy, it has slowed them down even more. Gene added that they are trying every angle, trying both the Carriage Contract and Title Transfer and it's just not moving at this time. The Bureau did issue a No Affect Ruling on the project; probably wouldn't have been required to go to Fish and Wildlife, other than being a sister agency and it's brought it to a halt. The work at Horsetooth Dam is progressing well. The filter and bean structure on the backside are coming along. Delhur Industries has been awarded the contract to complete the work on all the dams. Staff has been working around the clock patrolling the reservoirs since the tragedy. The FBI has allowed staff to back off on security as of Sunday, September 23. FORT COLLINS WA& BOARD MINUTES PAGE 2 SEPTEMBER 24, 2001 Gene also commented that the Districts Fall Water User Meeting has been set for Wednesday, November 14 and will be held at the Ramkota in Greeley. Questions David Lauer asked for clarification on who Fish and Wildlife Service is getting static from or what is the other entity that Gene had said was concerned about endangered species controls. Gene responded that he had reported to the board several months ago about the impending litigation that the West Slope, the Colorado River Conservation District, had raised about the CBT not being operated according to the law. That has triggered the Fish and Wildlife Service to look at not only the pipeline issue, but also the rehabilitation of Horsetooth and the entire CBT operations. ODOR ISSUES AT DRAKE WATER RECLAMATION FACILITY (DWRF) Brian Janonis, Water Resources and Treatment Manager, showed two exhibits highlighting the locations of the Drake Water Reclamation Facility and the areas under consideration of development. Residential development in that area is happening faster than expected. The Rigden Farm is currently under development and the Johnson's have an option for development of their property. LaFarge is also studying potential development. Utilities staff is concerned that development is moving closer to the site. Brian provided two handouts, "Chronology of Events Leading to Odor Issues" and "Policy for the Water Quality Control Division for Site Applications". He explained that the Water Quality Control Division requires a site application for all facility expansions. They require a 1,000-foot buffer for all mechanical plants. Brian displayed a map with 1,000-foot buffer, which borders the Rigden Farm development and would encroach on the Johnson farm development. Utility staff has been working with City Planning and the City Attorney's office to draft a land use code change to establish a 1,000-foot buffer around all wastewater treatment plants, including the Drake and Mulberry Reclamation facilities and Boxelder Sanitation District. The land use code currently allows development right up to the plat boundary. Staff is requesting that the Water Board support the proposed buffer and change to the land use code. Brian explained that the proposed site near Ptarmigan is no longer a viable option. In 1998, the North Front Range Water Quality Planning and Management Association completed a regional wastewater study, which concluded that all individual districts could handle their own growth. All future Fort Collins expansion will be at the DWRF site. Brian mentioned that the City is in the process of selling Ptarmigan site to the Natural Resources Department. An appraisal is expected within two weeks. It would be too expensive to develop the site for just the City of Fort Collins. David Lauer asked whether staff feels the area is large enough for future expansions. Brian responded that staff feels that with the addition of land the Utility is planning to purchase, the site is large enough for the foreseeable future. Brian mentioned that the Utility has asked their consultant to perform a study of odors and toxic emissions from the DWRF facility. This study will take approximately one year. Without any site - specific data, the state policy guideline of a 1,000-foot buffer is all we have to go by. Even with this buffer, staff believes that some odor control will be necessary. FORT COLLINS WATO BOARD MINUTES • PAGE 3 SEPTEMBER 24, 2001 Motion Ted Borstad made a motion to recommend adoption of the 1000-foot corridor identified on exhibit A and B. David Lauer seconded the motion. Vote Approved unanimously ER COUNTY'S PROPOSED RENTING CITY SURPLUS Dennis Bode directed the Board to the agenda item in their packet. The Water Supply Committee has met several times to discuss the county's proposed point system for surplus water and in July the City received a formal request from the County Commissioners to look at it. Even thought the committee and staff are sympathetic to the county's goal of preserving agricultural land as open space, they believe that the proposed point system may not achieve the desired goal. In addition, they believe that such a program would restrict the City's flexibility in managing its surplus water and would be difficult to administer in a fair manner. The Committee and staff believe that it is desirable to continue with the present system of allocating surplus supplies. It was pointed out that the City would continue to have significant quantities of surplus water in most years that will likely be made available to agricultural users. Motion Thomas Brown made a motion that the Water Board recommends that the City not adopt the point system proposed by Larimer county and instead continues to use the current system of allocating the City's surplus water. Robert Ward seconded the motion. Discussion John Morris asked if we would be losing out on some open space opportunities to which Dennis Bode responded that it was hard to know. In the long run the Committee felt that the point system would have little ability to influence open space. David Lauer stated that maybe the best way to respond is that we don't feel we are the appropriate entity to take the lead on this certain thing. While we have to do the work on the water rental policy, it is such a small piece of the larger problem of preserving open space. Staff will work on the proper way to relay the Water Board's recommendation back to the County. Vote Approved unanimously. RIVER FLOODPLAIN V. LOOMIS AVENUE Carrie Daggett, Assistant City Attorney, prepared and had included in the Boards packet an outline on the Variance Hearing process. Carrie directed members to the outline under heading 2, citing City Code Section 10-39 (h) and stated that those are the two main factors and basic criteria the Board should keep in mind and look at before their decision. Bill Fischer responded that one of his questions was what is meant by " good and sufficient cause." Carrie responded by suggesting that, FORT COLLINS WAW BOARD MINUTES • PAGE 4 SEPTEMBER 24, 2001 in making a determination of good and sufficient cause, it is appropriate for the Board to consider whether there is "good and sufficient cause" based upon the specific conditions of this particular variance rather than looking at pending policy issues that might tend to distract the Board from really looking at the specific application under consideration. Bill Fisher inquired whether more specifically under the definition of good and sufficient cause, the Board is required to look at certain criteria, perhaps safety may be one, or rather than just allowing the request of the property owner because the extra space may be nice. Carrie responded that actually the risk question, the safety question and those types of questions would tend to relate to the second factor to be considered, that is, the general question of how much risk is presented. She further indicated that the question as to good and sufficient cause really relates more to the evaluation of whether this is a situation where is it really necessary that there be a variance - - that is, whether the requested variance is either the best alternative reasonably available or there aren't any alternatives. Bill Fischer stated that the problem he is having is that good and sufficient cause is in the mind of the beholder; it could be that it is a very subjective thing. He indicated that he is trying to get a grasp somehow to see if there are objective standards to the Board that should apply in order to come up with a determination. Carrie responded that in some respects, the determination of sufficient cause is at the discretion of the Board based on its evaluation of this particular variance, perhaps taking into account the other types of variances the Board sees and considers, and keeping in mind that overall picture and the goal of maintaining a consistent approach to variances requested in similar circumstances. Staff Presentation -Variance Hearing Marsha Hilmes-Robinson explained that for property located at 219 South Loomis Street, the owner would like to take the existing house and add a 510-square foot addition consisting of a kitchen, living room and a bedroom. The applicant has already obtained a floodplain use permit and a building permit for the addition that meets all applicable floodplain requirements. The applicant is asking for a variance for the bedroom, as elevating the room would result in a step going into the room. The applicant gave two reasons for requesting a variance. One is related to the age of the home and because the structure is older than 50 years, the City's Historic Preservation staff reviews any changes. Staff suggested that the owner keep the windows of the existing house and the windows of the new addition at the same elevation as viewed from the outside. To do so while elevating the floor in the new addition would result in the distance from the floor to the bottom of the window being shorter. The applicants building permit includes this suggestion. The second reason is the owner would prefer not to have a step at the entrance to the bedroom. The Historic Preservation office does not have any formal regulation that applies to these circumstances, they just offer suggestions. If the applicant decides not to follow the Historic Preservation suggestions, the only consequence would be the possibility of the house not being eligible for listing as contributing to a historic district. The previously approved building permit would allow the building to be designated as contributing to a Historic District if one were to be created in the future and if the owner wanted it to be designated. FORT COLLINS WAO2130ARD MINUTES • PAGE 5 SEPTEMBER 24, 2001 Marsha explained that the property is located in the Old Town floodplain. The 100-year discharge is 40 cfs, but this is the old rainfall standard, as she does not have all of the updates with the new rainfall criteria, so that will go up somewhat in the future. The ground elevation is 5003.1 msl, the elevation of the first floor of the existing house is 5004.23, and the 100-year water surface elevation is 5003.5 msl. Therefore the elevation of the existing house is slightly above the 100-year event water surface elevation; however there would be some water around the house. The regulatory elevation is the 100-year flood level plus 18 inches, which is 5005.0 msl. Applicants Presentation - Mr. Kurt Amason Mr. Amason thanked Marsha for all her work and assistance with the process. He handed out photos showing the status of the project. He stated that he feels that having a step going into the bedroom is a safety issue. The requirements say the whole bedroom has to be elevated, so he would have to have a step into the bedroom, which would be totally elevated. Following code, he has to have 36 inches beyond the door for wheel chair accessibility into the room, and that puts him dangerously close to the closet, so if you step out of the closet, you fall down the 9-inch drop. Mr. Amason is proposing the bedroom be at the existing level. The current wall that has been poured is at the level, so it would be back -filled and poured slab. So in order to maintain the historical aspects of the house, they put slats in the poured wall itself. The siding could be brought down over the floodwall, so you really can't see the foundation. The next two windows will be added after the process is completed and if he doesn't get approval to keep the bedroom at the same level, his current windows will be 8-inches above the floor if he has to raise the floor. The current plan requires him to have steps inside the bedroom, so he has gone through this entire process to this point and designed the house with the full intention to comply. If he has to raise this building, he will, but he is concerned about the safety of stepping out of the bedroom in the middle of the night. He can certainly live with a stairway and a step going into the new addition, he's trying to restore this old house and keep the integrity of the neighborhood. Tom Sanders stated that if water comes into the building during a 100-year flood you've got that poured concrete so it wouldn't come in. Mr. Amason responded that he is beefing up all of the foundation all the way around the house with stucco and chicken wire. He stated that he actually did get water with the flood through a little back window that took out his furnace and water heater. He added that this will be built up to the floodplain requirements and the water would have a problem getting into the basement again. When he first started, bedrooms were originally considered for the back of the house, which ended up being more in the floodway. Putting the bedroom to the side of the house was less of an impact. The real issue is the bedroom. If the stairs were outside the bedroom, the City has an issue regarding doors opening into hallways. They prefer the door opening into a bedroom. The bedroom is 22% of the new addition and 9% of the entire house. Mr. Amason added that the Historical Society was pretty firm regarding the matching of the windows and pointed out that the existing windows are long and already low to the ground. He also pointed out that by building up the foundation, and raising the level of his basement window he should be able to keep the water out. Tom Sanders noted that he feels that stairs in the bedroom is a safety issue here as well. FORT COLLINS WA* BOARD MINUTES • PAGE 6 SEPTEMBER 24, 2001 Action: Motion and Second Bill Fischer moved that we approve the variance. He felt the presentation showed good and sufficient cause for the variance and granting of the variance will not result in increased flood heights, any additional threat to public safety or to public or private property, any extraordinary expense, any nuisance or trespass, any fraud or victimization of the public or conflict with the existing local laws or ordinances. Robert Ward seconded the motion. Further Discussion Tom Sanders reminded the board what they are voting on and that they are bypassing a rule that they were all very adamant about. Marsha responded to a question from David Lauer wanting to know why staff did not make any recommendations. She said that there were a lot of issues with it, it is a tough call and they didn't feel like they could make a good call on this one. There are pros and cons both ways. Marsha further added that Mr. Amason has an approved permit, so it can work and meet all the criteria which is one of the biggest drawbacks they see because there is a way to make it work. Mr. Amason stated that this will be his house when work has been completed, it will be a brand new restored house. Action: Vote Motion passed. One opposed. Staff Reports Treated Water Production Summary - Dennis Bode Dennis directed staff to the handout in packets. In the month of August we used 4,229-Acre Feet, which was 1.8% above projected use for an average year. He felt we are running at projected use for an average year. Committee Reports Water Supply - Tom Brown Tom reported they decided to recommend to the Board that they move ahead with plans to expand Halligan Reservoir. In November 2002, they would begin consulting with individuals, organizations, and industries who may be interested in the city's plan to expand Halligan. Updating cost estimates to determine if the city's cash -in -lieu rate is sufficient to cover the city's cost of the project, assuming the project goes ahead. Conservation and Public Education - David Lauer Committee met today and talked about bottled water. Kevin Gertig provided a presentation on "Bottled Water Case History's and Feasibility's for Fort Collins Water Utility." The committee is very interested in looking at the feasibility of bottling water as a public relations and educational tool. The committee's next step is to meet with Carrie Daggett and determine what kind of alterations in code and statues would be required for the City to do. FORT COLLINS WA41t BOARD MINUTES • PAGE 7 SEPTEMBER 24, 2001 Other Business Rami Naddy requested a discussion on how we are insuring the security of our drinking water, pretreatment and post treatment since the September tragedy. Tom Sanders recommended that the Board go into Executive Session to further discuss this issue. At the suggestion of Carrie Daggett, the Board was officially declared in Executive Session and at this time, all visitors left the meeting and no minutes were taken. Adjournment Meeting adjourned at 4:50 p.m.