Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutLand Conservation And Stewardship Board - Minutes - 06/14/2006MINUTES CITY OF FORT COLLINS LAND CONSERVATION & STEWARDSHIP BOARD Regular Meeting 200 W. Mountain, Suite A June 14, 2006 For Reference: Bill Bertschy, Chair - 491-7377 Mayor Doug Hutchinson - 416-2154 John Stokes, Staff Liaison - 221-6263 Board Members Present Bill Bertschy, Karyl Ting, Greg Snyder, Michelle Brown, Linda Stanley, Vicky McLane, Greg Eckert, Paul Hudnut Board Members Absent Michelle Grooms Staff Present Natural Resources Dent: Daylan Figgs, John Stokes, Mark Sears, Real Estate Services: Pat Hyland Bill Bertschy called the meeting to order at 6:06 p.m. Guests Randy Sidens, District Engineer Boxelder Sanitation Service, Jeff Couch, Engineer Boxelder Sanitation Service, Mike Noonan, Engineer Boxelder Sanitation Service Agenda Review New business: Prairie Dog Item. Greg would like to ask to consider flipping the Cathy Fromme Prairie easement discussion to after the easement policy and procedure presentation. John said the reason why the presentation was first was for Pat's time and because it's really straight forward and not as complicated as other easements. And we're correcting a past mistake and ratifying the fact that it's there. Mark Sears would like to discuss the Platte River Power Authority Easement across greater Mariposa. Public Comments None Land Conservation & Stewardship Board June 14, 2006 Page 2 of 11 Review and Approval of Minutes Linda Stanley motioned to approve the May 17, 2006 minutes with one correction: Include Greg Eckert in attendance. Vicky McLane seconded. All in favor of approval of the minutes. Pat Hyland presented Cathy Fromme Prairie. Pat referred the board to maps and discussed boundary lines and subdivisions platted in 1987. Shortly afterwards, the developer installed a phone cable on what he thought was the southern 10 feet of this sub -division which was set aside for easement. But, in fact, he put it about 7 feet into Cathy Fromme Prairie. The process as I understand it is the sub -division developer trenches, Qwest comes along and puts the cable in the trench, put up the cable boxes and the developer builds it in and it's finished. Qwest does not verify the location. Therefore a telephone cable is about 7 feet south of your northern border in Cathy Fromme. It runs the full quarter mile from Taft Hill Road West to the northwestern corner of Cathy Fromme Prairie, and then it goes off into Taft Canyon up into Foxhill sub -division so it's out of Cathy Fromme Prairie. McLane: So what are all the lots in the green? Hyland: There's actually a sub -division in Cathy Fromme. It was sub -divided and never sold so the city acquired it with the sub -division attached. I have the plate of that. I understand from Helen Madision that there are other parts of Cathy Fromme Prairie that still have some sub divided lots. Someday we'll be talking about vacating the sub -divisions going through that process for no other reason than getting them off the maps. But at this point it causes no harm. McLane: It confuses some of us who aren't familiar with it. Hyland: Don't try to build a house there. The problem is that telephone cable has been in since 1987 or 1988, they've been using it all the time and it was discovered by accident but it was on Cathy Fromme Prairie about a year ago. We've been having discussions with Qwest as to ownership and what to do. We have finally received confirmation from Qwest that yes, it is their cable. Yes, it was verified by their surveyor that it is on Cathy Fromme Prairie. And yes, Qwest would like to do something but they would hope not to have to dig it up and move it. So, what we're asking for from this board is approval for a 10 foot wide easement where that cable lies now, for the use of that easement solely for that cable, never to be replaced, upgraded, or added to for other kinds of utilities. And that's what we're going to request from council. It can stay there, but if they want to put in a fiber optic for example, they're going to have to come back to us and request a new easement for that type of utility. Eckert: Is the existing easement that was supposed to have been put on there? Hyland: It is still there. If you take a look from S. Taft Hill (referring to maps), if you look at that line, you'll see behind the houses that are on the eastern side of the sub- Land Conservation & Stewardship Board June 14, 2006 Page 3 of 11 division you'll see that they're backed up about ... there is a rail fence and Cathy Fromme is about 10 feet south of the line,. you'll see the houses a lot of their fences on the eastern side are about 20 feet north of our fence. As you look further west and there's some fences that come back about 10 feet, they're too far. • Eckert: So if they were to put a fiber optic line in there other than some people that built fences were they perhaps shouldn't have it's not really going to be a hardship for anyone. • Hyland: No. They can use the original easement. We didn't think it would be appropriate to have them remove the cable. • Stanley: Basically this means nothing is going to happen. They don't have to dig it up; it's there so let's leave it. • Hyland: Helen Madison was on -site looking at another problem at S. Taft Hill and she saw a Qwest employee leaving the prairie. And she questioned his presence and he said he was checking the line. Apparently there's another box about half -way up that section. He showed her where the line was. We're asking this board to approve by recommendation or recommend approval by the city council. Then it goes to city council for an easement in the usual city council manor. Paul Hudnut moved that the board recommend to city council approval of a 10-foot wide easement where that cable lies now, for the use of that easement solely for that cable, never to be replaced, upgraded, or added to for other kinds of utilities. Michelle Brown seconded the motion. The board unanimously approved the motion. Presentation by Mark Sears on Easement Policy and Procedures. The board refereed to Mark's hand-outs. • Stanley: Are you recording how the restoration is being done for other people to look at? It would be nice to see the process and what's been working for wetlands, grasslands and diverse areas. • Sears: We ourselves are very in -tune to restoration and have been doing restoration for the last 7 or 8 years but we've ramped it up in the last 2-3 years. Restoration this year are put off to another year due to no rain. Real small sites has irrigation. Unless the site is already irrigated it becomes complicated with pumps and water rights. • Stokes: Rick Bachand has an extensive data base with all our restoration sites. All of the sites get monitored frequently. • Stanley: If Rick ever had to leave one day, that someone could come into his position and look at what he's done and pick right up. Sometimes you get these great people who know this stuff then they leave with the information. • Sears: We'll have a chance to share our resource management plan with you. It's not linked to the GIS map yet, but it's going to be soon. It will tell you sub -areas, for instance a site like Cathy Fromme Prairie might have 30-40 sub -areas. They surveyed the vegetation and come up with a prescription for each area that needs restoration. • Snyder: Mark do you, in this alternative analysis or in any of this analysis, is there any economic impact or community good. It sounds like there's a difference in how Land Conservation & Stewardship Board June 14, 2006 Page 4 of 11 people are treated if whether they are a city owned utility, it doesn't matter whether it's a cooperative entity or a city owned utility, they're providing a service to folks who already live here and paying the tax to finance the open space and when you create an unrealistic economic burden for them, to supply service, they in turn just pass that on to the people are required to use their services. Is there any kind of analysis given to a balance point between what's reasonable and what's allowable? • Sears: Mark reads from the policy and states those things are taken into account. • Stokes: An example would be easement you all approved on the clean up of Mariposa that PRPA is putting in. You could have asked that that line be under -grounded but it would have cost $4.5M a mile and we didn't think that sounded reasonable. They came back to us with some other things we can do that are much less costly that we think have large benefits for your program and we agreed. It does definitely weigh into the decision making process. • Sears: Another example is the water line across Cathy Fromme Prairie involving the Ft. Collins and Loveland Water District. We could have said absolutely not; you put it in the road where it belongs. In order for them to do that they would have had to tear up the road. And the city couldn't afford to replace and relocate that water line. We need to work with them to allow the water line to be built in a suitable area. It was unreasonable to expect that pipeline should go under the road. • Snyder: As far as where the South Fort Collins Sanitation District processing plant, how is there line capacity going into that, they've been expanding their processing capacity. In the future are they going to have to have more easement to come through? • Sears: We just granted them an easement last fall; both the city and the county because it's joint ownership. They just have one new line that is replacing an old, smaller line. • Stokes: It was this board that approved that easement. • Snyder: That would be kind of between a rock and a hard -place; natural areas and what they do. • Sears: With sewer lines they needed to put the line where they did. • Eckert: Some things we've been discussing, this item 41, $2,450 per acre. Since you're just getting into the restoration work and monitoring, will you be able to re- evaluate this in 5-10 years? • Sears: I think you need to re-evaluate it now. That number is at least 5 years old now, so we need to re-evaluate it. • Eckert: The criticism, the idea of restoration is that folks will just decide that yeah we can go in and do things when ever we want to because we can always restore it and the fact is you're never going to restore what was there before. I think we're true in the imphasy of putting evaluation on it. We need consistent resources and things like that so it'd be worth looking at things like that every so often. • Stokes: Very good point. • Eckert: Is there an automatic adjustment formula that could be plugged into that? • Sears: Could be. The thing that we haven't taken into account is, let's say someone comes in and they disturb a quarter of an acre, well, that's not very efficient to come Land Conservation & Stewardship Board June 14, 2006 Page 5 of 11 in and control the restoration. Some of the cases are flawed a little bit. 1 '/x acres we might only get $3600, whereas 10-15 acres that might be more representative of the $2400, large scale restoration. We need to take a look at it, in some areas we probably come out ahead. Where we felt it was really important to establish this policy is we new once the contractor was done, the site was initially restored, that it would be a battle year after year to go back to a utility company and they talked with the contractor, then by the time they finished it's probably for not. We'd be faced with having to do it ourselves so we thought we should do it ourselves. It's been well received with the utilities and the natural areas staff. And the weed control is done all at one time making it a very effective policy. We do try to recover the cost of managing the easement request process. We do a great deal of reviewing at the staff level and bring things to you that we are endorsing and have done all the homework that could possibly do even if we're not endorsing it try to limit the un-answered questions. Then it goes to council for two readings of an ordinance. We try to get it on a consent calendar, all issues have been resolved as best as we can so we don't take as much of council's time. Stokes: One thing about easements that I've noticed over the years working in public land management and privately conserved land management, in the old days, the utilities and anyone who needed an easement could just go any where they wanted to. They would trench a line, throw it in and they were done. We're shifting away from that mode to a more sophisticated mode when it comes to locating these lines and then restoring the surface. I think that's a positive transition, but there's tension around that transition because people still want to do it the old way and they're not used to the more sophisticated way. And sometimes it's a struggle for our staff and the applicant to get through the process. I would say over the last 3 years, applicants have gotten used to our procedures and know the process and policy. Snyder: I think the important part is the consistency across the board. Stokes: The other tension is over the restoration fee. We expect people to compensate us for work. It's a lot of work to get something to grow back in those places. Stanley: And you're protecting the public investment. The public has paid for this so, it makes a lot of sense. Daylan Figgs discusses his hand-out on Various Easements. Daylan speaks to maps regarding KB Homes and Pelican Marsh. KB Home has requested a 50' wide drainage easement from the new platting for Province Town filing 3. Mark mentioned the large drainage easement across Pelican Marsh that KB Home helped construct years back. This easement allows drainage from their new filing to go into the existing easement on Pelican Marsh. It's a small project. • McLane: Are they asking permission to allow the water to come into the easement? • Figgs: Referring to the map: it's actually a small constructed swell. It's 50' wide and about 75' long. The water flows into the existing structure. Land Conservation & Stewardship Board June 14, 2006 Page 6 of 11 Greg Snyder motioned to approve the KB Home 50' wide drainage easement from the new platting for Province Town filing 3. Michelle Brown seconded the motion. The board unanimously approved. Daylan presented a serious of easements. Randy Sidens, District Engineer, presented the Boxelder project speaking about various easements and how they tie back into Boxelder Sanitation's master plan. Also presenting are Jeff Couch and Mike Noonan, both engineers working on the project. The idea is to have the temporary easement there in case of flooding during heavy rain. Pumps can be put in and divert water around while the flood comes down. Construction of the easement will start September or October 2006. • Stokes: When permit right-of-way is established on the south end of Banko, how does that impact our ability to access that property off of the frontage road? • Sidens: The practical thing would be for the owners to be granted a right-of-way along the north side of Aries. • Couch: Referring to the maps pointed out a 12' existing access easement along the south side of the property. It's a perfect application for selling splitting 35s. All of the connections are there for the water and sewer and the access already exists. • Bertschy: What about future chances of coming back, capacity and expansion? • Sidens: We're sizing this line at 30" and we fully believe this will handle... • Noonan: It's 7.6M gallons a day and that's based on the currant Tinmath master plan. And the densities in Larimer County which is one unit per 2.29 acres and in Weld County we used one unit in 2'/2 acres via septic tank. Those were the numbers we used to calculate those flows. That's the current planning that exists now, it's fairly rural. Paul Hudnut motioned to recommend that Boxelder create the necessary easements. Greg Snyder seconded the motion. The board unanimously approved the motion. • Bertschy: Restoration and temporary easements therefore one year except one is a bit longer, is that how it reads? • Sidens: its 2 years. • Bertschy: What's the restoration that's called for, with our policy? • Figgs: We'll restore basically back to the vegetation that's there now; mainly pasture. • Bertschy: Is there a longer term restoration, in other words are we charging them to take care of that? • Figgs: Yes, it's their choice whether to maintain it in perpetuity or pay. Workplan Bertschy mentioned adding the wildlife management policy plan. The plan will include a section on prairie dogs and feral pigs. Eckert: Two thoughts, what are our two biggest opportunities over the next year, Soapstone. Our first meeting discussed the connector areas and having a strategy around Land Conservation & Stewardship Board June 14, 2006 Page 7 of 11 that. What might not be on the workplan that we ought to be talking about? If our role is to approve easements then fine, but I thought it started out being a bigger vision. • Stokes: We would like the board to dive into the Soapstone management review. That's going to take a fair amount of time and will be challenging. Restoration is another board initiative. If there are other issues that the board perceives that it would like to delve into then we need direction from the board. The city has a restoration program that's really robust, as well as a weed control program. We're building capital improvements, such as Bobcat Ridge and various trails that are all moving along. The new things that are coming out represent and opportunity for the board to become involved are things like Soapstone Natural Area. There will be other things the board will be faced with. We have to bring these easements to you as a board. As we delve into the wildlife management and Soapstone Prairie, that's more substantive than the work we've asked of you. • Snyder: I would like to add into this area and say the coming two years the discussion on the management plan for the Poudre corridor properties. I think when the state moves that rest area up to Prospect by the welcome center, it's my understanding we get that property back that it sets on? To me, that property along the Poudre from Mulberry to Drake, it is a huge valuable resource. It would be a great enhancement to the Natural Areas program if we made those areas public accessible and user friendly. I see kids fishing, small boat use, some picnic tables, I'm not talking about making a park out of it. Some natural area that people can actually use for something other than hiking/biking/horseriding or driving by and looking at. I think the public will buy in a lot better to the natural areas program. The program is going to come under attack as the rest of the economic community falls away so I think we need to have at least some discussion on what can possibly be done out there at that area to make it user friendly and provide a service to the community and blunt some of the attack that's coming. • Stokes: That'd be great. I can bring some maps in and have a work session. We can discuss what's happening out there so everyone knows and talk about ideas for further improvements out there. • Ting: Should this be brought to the public? • Stokes: That's a great idea and it depends on what we think we'd like to do. • Snyder: I'm pretty sure I violated the law already on most of those ponds out there. Right now you've got to climb over fences. • Sears: The prime fishing is Arapaho Bend on the south, Prospect Ponds, Riverbend Ponds. Further to the west is McMurry. There are lots of other opportunities to put more ponds depending on how the gravel mine companies restore there properties. We're working with all the gravel mining between Shields and Taft and Taft and Overland to try and get recreation rights. There is huge opportunities in that corridor. • Stokes: I think it would be really helpful to role out those maps and think about the whole system and what's happening out there and what could happen to improve it. I think that would be really worthwhile. • Ting: This ties into my question. Seems like a lot of times you guys are doing all this work and all this planning, and then you distill out these little pieces that you bring to us to discuss. I don't really have a good picture of the scope of everything that you Land Conservation & Stewardship Board June 14, 2006 Page 8 of 11 do. And if you're asking for input outside of those boundaries then perhaps somehow condense that into a place that we know what you're doing. • Stokes: In July we're bringing in the foothills management plan. And that's a revision of an existing plan so you will be looking at a system of our property, not just bits and pieces of it. • Stanley: And fit in with the county plans and how those two work together and there is a bigger vision and we don't see that and a lot of times we see a little piece here and so on. So I think it would be good to get Kaylynn to come in for an hour or so to talk about that and what they're doing there. In fact, why the city has bought some of the properties that the county is now managing or who helped out at the Blue Sky trail or what ever it happens to be. • Stokes: That's a great idea. • Stanley: I think that partnership is really important. • Sears: The other layer of planning is our own parks department and trail planning and connections. • Stokes: Help me as your staff liaison; understand what you need to know. We get so versed in our own language and work that sometimes it's hard to step back and help people understand what we're doing system -wide. • Ting: I think what you're speaking to is just laying out the plan on a broader scope. • Stokes: One touchstone is the LCS framework. That plan is a touchstone for us. That's what I refer to on occasion. • Bertschy: Do you want to have a short pre -amble with our mission? • Stokes: As board reads, John speaks to paragraph 2: I put that down and hope people are comfortable with that. I described a role of the board that I would like you to play. Do you have any feedback or changes you can let me know. I think that the board represents an important communication vehicle to the community about the work of this program. Informally, as you're meeting with friends and family try to find out communities to discuss the work of your board and the natural areas program. Occasionally you will be asked to visit properties with us, attending meetings and social gatherings. • Ting: I think that first sentence is a little strange. It sounds like don't say anything if you disagree with something going on in the natural areas program don't mention it. • Bertschy: I don't think individually we should be representing ourselves as a collective. I think I am a strong representative of the Natural Areas program; I don't represent you John as a staff person. There's that independence, as far as us being available that's a good thing. • Stokes: You can cross that first sentence out. • Snyder: My understanding was that part of my reason for being here is to serve as a conduit to areas of the community that I felt wasn't being served by the city or boards or commissions. So, instead of thinking of any of us as individually as a representative of the collective, that we should be more thinking of ourselves as a conduit for the collective. So that when we come here and sit around the table that interest about preserving the natural state of things, or representative interest for public usage, or something outside of hikers/bikers/horse riders are represented. I Land Conservation & Stewardship Board June 14, 2006 Page 9 of 11 think the idea is to get a multi -faceted overview of what we're doing or remotely faceted questioning; not just everything on one side. • Stanley: I don't think that's what John was talking about. You're talking about the public coming back to the program, representing an interest back to here so that these guys can hear it. • Brown: Yes, but we're going to be talking to the public about what's going on in Natural Areas when they find out you're on the board. So you are going to be talking to the public. • Stanley: Right, I agree. I think we should strike that first sentence. • Hudnut: When I interviewed they wrote that we're liaison to city council and there wasn't much discussion beyond that from Mayor Hutchinson. • Stanley: You're right. On the AQAB we were told that we can not go to the public and can't have our own meetings unless we wanted to change our by-laws. • Stokes: It has to be posed. For instance, when we go to Soapstone on July 20 that will be posted because it's considered a public meeting. I want to go back to Paul's question. There are all kinds of "threats" to the program ranging from funding of plans, political and economic threats and so forth. I want to come back and see if that resonated with any of you. • Hudnut: It was a feeling like part of this board. You know what you're doing technically and I am not going to have any professional insight on how to reclaim a natural area. My feeling is that my skill set isn't being utilized in this board if you need it; just give me a phone call if there's an issue. I'm comfortable with the staff and the question becomes how do we balance what our budget is and what we have and are we spending the money in ways that we think is correct. If there are political issues and people don't understand about a 6 million dollar shortage at the city level and yet we have a pile of money and we're spending it on land. Are there issues that we can get in front of and do a good job of protecting these pastures so we're not blind -sided down the road. • Stokes: 1 think it might be helpful to update the board on the status of our budget. I did give a cursory update at our last meeting; what we spent and year to date revenues and so forth but it might be helpful to go back to first principals and have a talk about how and where we get our money and how we're budgeting going forward. I just prepared a graph for the mayor to show the base budget for the next couple of years and I re -did the categories so anyone can look at it and understand it. I'd like to bring it to the next meeting. Darin is planning to write a column on the myths of city budgeting. One of the myths is that the city can take natural areas funding and spending in on the youth activity center, or building an intersection somewhere and we can't do that. • Stanley: People don't understand program budgeting and how one program's funding can not be allotted to another program. • Hudnut: Every survey involving Fort Collins, natural areas and recreation rate at the top of the list. The money we spend is probably below the value that people in our community get out of it. . Land Conservation & Stewardship Board June 14, 2006 Page 10 of 11 • Stokes: There's a couple of interesting facts that are relevant to this conversation. For example, the city's non -operating budget is $234M a year excluding utilities, that's all funds. Our operating budget is about $9M, so that's about 3.3 % of the cities non - operating budget. And when I tell people that and put our program in context that makes people think hard. Soapstone's original purchase of $7.3M; it cost the city $7M to rebuild the intersection at Jefferson and 287.One intersection cost us $7M to rebuild. • Snyder: The intersection is used daily where as Soapstone may be visited once a year. • Stokes: I'm trying to put this in some sort of larger context to help people understand the relativity of the money we have. Mark Sears presented Prairie Dog Management Plan Mark handed out a letter that was sent regarding prairie dog management. Natural Resources is obligated by our prairie dog policy to notify 6 weeks prior to doing fumigation on our sites so they have the opportunity to find a relocation site; and convince us to use relocation rather than fumigation. The Sierra Club is no longer the notification agency. Bob Knightwalker with the Larimer County Humane Society has agreed to be that contact person. Prairie dog restoration is going on at McKee Farm, Arapaho Bend, Fischer Point, and Pineridge. We eliminated about 75% of the population through fumigation over last fall last year and this spring. We need to remove all the prairie dogs in the 50-60 acres and we started today. Notification of the removal was done in the form of a press release and verbally to city council. We are monitoring all of our prairie dog colonies by mapping, vegetation and density to figure out how many prairie dogs are there and determine are their sites where we need to reduce the numbers of prairie dogs because they're harming the vegetation, or densities are beyond sustainability or are they approaching our buffers that we've established between the joining properties. We anticipate additional prairie dog removals later this summer or early fall and notify the prairie dog advocates of our plans. We're exploring contraception but right now there's no legal form of prairie dog contraception. There are several experimental contraceptives and we're working with the USDA to have an experimental project on one of our natural areas. Mark Sears PRPA Easement Presentation Mark Sears presented the Platte River Power Authority's (PRPA) request for an easement for a transmission line along the west side of the railroad tracks through Colina Mariposa Natural Area. The Platte River Power Authority held an open house and invited those that are adjacent or near and the people that live along Registry Ridge never showed up. They received the artist rendering and invitations to the open house. We've received calls from a few people near the site advocating the line be put along Shields. John and I have talked about it and are somewhat ambivalent as to which way we go. From what I remember at that open house was that most people felt comfortable allowing this line to be put in because it was Land Conservation & Stewardship Board June 14, 2006 Page 11 of 11 along the railroad tracks. PRPA will take an existing line under ground, and basically removing one power line and replacing it with another. They are also going to take another power line that runs across McKee Farm and put that underground. A mile of line across Longview Farm along College Avenue will also be put in. Are you willing to entertain that as an option. If so, we'll have further discussions with the residents of Registry Ridge. The board was in agreement with Mark's presentation on the PRPA easements. Announcements Mark announced Geri Kidawski is going to replace Tamara Courtney at Nix. Greg Eckert announced Brian Dunbar and Valerie Kimmal have a book coming out on sustainability. There is a party this Friday at New Belguim brewery; it starts at 3:00 or 3:30. Linda Stanley announced an article about Larimer County's 10`h Anniversary Celebration. I want you to know there's going to be a public celebration in the fall. The current celebration is for the steering committee and the open lands boards. Adjournment The meeting was adjourned at 9:00pm Submitted by John Stokes, Director, Natural Resources