Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutParks And Recreation Board - Minutes - 12/05/2012Parks & Recreation Board Meeting – December 5, 2012 Page 1 of 7 BE A GOOD STEWARD: Protect & Respect your Parks, Trails & Recreation Facilities Call Meeting to Order: Rob Cagen called the meeting to order 5:33pm Special Note: Rob’s term is up on December 31, and he will be moving on to work with the Naturopathic Physicians in Colorado to help them lobby for licensing in Colorado. He wanted to let the Board members know he enjoyed working with everyone on the Board and with staff. As the Board finishes the year on a high note by helping to get $250,000 for the Great Lawn at the Gardens he appreciated all the interactions with City Council members and Darin. Rob wanted the Board to keep up the meetings with the Council Members and Mayor, remember e-bikes and disc golf, and when designing the new parks keep Rugby fields in mind as Rugby is becoming a popular sport. The Board members thanked Rob for his leadership as Chair and thanked him for helping them to learn more about water with the speakers and all his work on helping to get 2B passed (Keep Fort Collins Great). Agenda Review & Items of Note: None Citizen Participation: None Approval of Minutes: Discussion: None Todd Galbate made the motion to approve the Parks & Recreation Board minutes of October 25, 2012, seconded by Michael Chalona – Minutes approved 8:0 Meeting Summary • Wendy Ryan with CSU Colorado Climate Center gave a presentation on Colorado weather. She showed how the mountains and the States elevation play a big role in our seasonal temperature variations and that drought is cyclical and common in our area. The snow pack in the mountains is very important for eastern Colorado as 75% of our water comes from the snow pack. • Dr. Mohr’s CSU Marketing Class from the College of Business presented their results from an intercept survey they developed and implanted at five community parks from September 25-October 1 to find out if users are satisfied with parks and what enhancements could be made for future use. • Pete Wray, Senior City Planner, presented the new Streetscape Design Standards & Guidelines to the Board with a focus on the new median designs and asked for a Board recommendation. The Board vote was 7:1 in support of the design guidelines (discussion and motion are in Full Minutes section). • Tim Buchanan, City Forester and Lindsay Ex, Environmental Planner, presented Land Use Code amendments for tree mitigation to allow for an extended flexible radius and replacing the ecological value lost from the removal of non- native trees. The Board voted 8:0 in support of both amendments to the Land Use Code (discussion and motion are in Full Minutes section). PARKS AND RECREATION BOARD Minutes of Regular Meeting Wednesday, December 5, 2012 5:30 p.m. Council Liaison: Kelly Ohlson Staff Liaisons: J.R. Schnelzer, 970-221-6301 Craig Foreman, 970-221-6618 Bob Adams, 970-221-6354 Chair: Rob Cagen Phone: 970-689-7559 (home) / 970-482-3971 (work) Parks & Recreation Board Meeting – December 5, 2012 Page 2 of 7 Full Minutes AGENDA ITEMS: Atmospheric Impacts on Parks & Recreation – Wendy Ryan, Colorado Climate Center Colorado has a crazy climate. We have the highest elevation in the Union, complex mountain topography, and with the mid-latitude location have lively seasonal changes. The result of this means we have generous sunshine and low humidity; i.e. people like it here. It also means we have large seasonal temperature variations as well as diurnal temperature ranges and rapid changes; which basically means we have warm days and cool nights. We also tend to have frequent but highly variable precipitation. The national annual average snowfall is greater than 72 inches in our mountains which is good for eastern Colorado because 75% of our water is from snowpack. However, we can also have large variations in precipitation from year to year. As an example in 2011 we were at an all-time high and in 2012 we are at an all-time low. The timing and intensity of precipitation and associated temperatures help determine soil moisture and plant growth. Drought is a frequent visitor to Colorado and we are lucky at CSU to have a weather station that’s been in place since 1890 which allows us to chart the cyclical drought occurrences, precipitation, and temperatures. With this data we can see that our temperatures are increasing and currently our precipitation is declining. The El Nino could help us but right now the forecast is too uncertain. If El Nino were to rally soon, the combination with negative or cool PDO (Pacific Decadal Oscillation) would improve snowpack prospects, as last seen in 1994/95. Discussion Board – Tim, how does this affect the trees? Are you concerned? Staff – Sure it’s a concern, the City trees are primarily dependent on irrigation, if we do have a severe drought the trees will be stressed and we could see mortality in many trees. Board – Are the warming temperatures just in Fort Collins? Wendy – Many other weather stations just don’t have the longevity to produce good analysis, so it’s hard to say. Board – Where is the weather station? Wendy – Just north of Lory Student Center Board – Is there a water restriction plan for next year? Staff – Donnie Dustin, Water Resource Manager, has been working on a plan if we have to appropriate CBT allocations. If we have rain/snow melt on the river and it gets too muddy from the fires, they can’t bring it through the water treatment plant so they’ll have to use other sources for water which could mean restrictions. Board – What does that mean for Parks? Staff – The Parks use raw water and typically water restrictions don’t apply to raw water, however we try to abide by the restrictions because it wouldn’t look right for us to water when other can’t. Board – The drought can change statewide demographics because even now Cow-calf is struggling and they are a huge income maker for Colorado; if the ranchers leave, it could have a big impact. CSU Marketing Research Class/ Intercept Survey – Dr. Gina Mohr The Marketing Research Class researched, developed and implemented an intercept survey for five community parks; City Park, Edora Park, Spring Canyon Park, Fossil Creek Park, and Rolland Moore Park. The purpose of the research request is to obtain information regarding the community’s satisfaction level with community parks. The intercept survey took place the week of September 25-October 1 at 11:00am and 3:00pm and they obtained 1,016 responses. Questions related to frequency of use, amenities, comfort, value, satisfaction and demographics. Results showed that 48% male and 51% female use the parks and the average age of the park user is 34. Fifteen percent of the people visiting the parks were from out of town. Most visitors get to the parks by car and visit the parks 1-5 times per month. The most important amenities in the parks are trail access, personal space, shelters, dog parks and water features. The parks were rated 85% overall good or above in cleanliness, and well-manicured; but most visitors felt the parks needed more bike racks. Overall recommendations are to conduct further research on why we have so many out of town visitors to our parks. And, conduct a long-term intercept survey study to help provide a complete picture of the park system. Parks & Recreation Board Meeting – December 5, 2012 Page 3 of 7 Discussion Board – The times that you did the intercept survey don’t necessarily reflect when the park is busiest, like during ballgames. This would alter the data. Class – That’s why we recommend a more long-term intercept survey, so this data can be captured. Board – Did the class have to have this approved through IRB? Dr. Mohr – No, it was a class project, but we did talk about ethics and the survey was approved by JR. Board – The value of the intercept survey is great, but I wonder if it could include people that don’t use the park. Board – Do you know how far people traveled? Class – We did get zip code information and felt we could get analysis from that, but we just didn’t include it in the presentation. Dr. Mohr – If any additional analysis is requested, I can provide that to JR. Board – This was well done, I’m very impressed with your class. Streetscape Standards & Guidelines Update – Pete Wray, Senior City Planner There are four related projects for the 2012 Streets & Stormwater Site Development Initiatives; that relate to the overall design of City streets. 1) LCUASS – Streetscape Design Standards & Guidelines update (to Council on December 18, 2012); 2) LCUASS – Street Classifications & Cross-section Design (2013); 3) Low Impact Development Standards (December 18, 2012); and 4) Street Demonstration Project (2014) Since the Streetscape Standards were first adopted in 2001, several factors led to the need for an update. The existing standards from 2001 are too general. There is no inclusion of hardscape design components. Over the years we have not seen a high level of design. There is no strategic targeting of investment and maintenance is not tied to the design. The purpose of the design update is to in design quality based on City Plan and the Transportation Master Plan vision and policy direction to have attractive streets that are recognized as world class. Staff has also received direction and City Management to “Raise the Bar” in overall design quality and maintenance for new standards. An interdepartmental staff team developed the new standards and this same team will continue to meet to coordinate future streetscape design and monitor completed projects to ensure successful outcomes. The updated document includes a map that identifies arterial streetscape types and levels of investment. The new standard for arterial medians reflects more variety of plant material selection and coverage with flexibility in choice of perennial-garden style and shrub-garden style design. Other design elements include wood mulch, river cobble, boulders, site features and low walls. An example of a recently competed project using the new standard is the median at Harmony and Lemay. For all streets, two turf grass types are allowed with parkway landscaping in addition to street trees including cool season turf grass and native warm season short grass. For local streets, an alternative to turf grass is allowed that includes low shrub and perennial plantings. Gateway intersections reflect the highest level of investment. Harmony and College is the most recent example of a gateway intersection incorporating these new standards. Applications for Low Impact Development are referenced in the updated document as well. As a characterization of the projected cost increment to implement the new streetscape standards in comparison to existing standards for installation and maintenance of new medians, the following costs are highlighted: Ex. Standard Cost: 1. Install: $23.00/Sq. Ft. ($184,000 per 1/8 Mile) 2. Maintenance: $.16/Sq. Ft. ($1,280 per 1/8 Mi.) New Standard Cost: 1. Install: $26.00/Sq. Ft. ($208,000 per 1/8 Mi.) 2. Maintenance: $.33/Sq. Ft. ($2,640 per 1/8 Mi.) 3. Annual Perennial replacement (Approx. $900) Two Parks Budget offers were recently funded for the 2013-2014 budget cycle including Offer 90.1 (Median Maintenance), and Offer 99.2 (Median Renovations). We would welcome a recommendation from the Parks & Recreation Board. Parks & Recreation Board Meeting – December 5, 2012 Page 4 of 7 Discussion Board – What department is going to maintain these new medians? Staff – Parks will. They have been a part of the team. Board – What happens if five years from now no funding is available to maintain these medians? They will start to look bad and then what happens? Board – Were the new streetscape standards a part of the offers that were approved? Staff – Yes Board – Was there any type of survey data available from the citizens to find out if they found these new medians desirable? Staff – There’s been no citizen survey, but public support as part of the Plan Fort Collins process supported the vision and policy direction in City Plan and the Transportation Master Plan describing a higher level of design and maintenance for streetscapes. Board – If this is already funded are you going to Council to just say, “Here it is”? Staff – the updated document will be considered by Council for adoption. Over the past two years we have been working on further defining what “world-class design” looks like, as directed by City Management, so I believe we have support. Board – There are two pieces to this, the cost to create and then the long-term cost to maintain; cost which over time continues to escalate. With all the needs we have, is this something that is really needed? Staff – Yes, this is an important project and this update reflects the expectation to raise the bar. The new standards will result in an incremental increase in construction and maintenance costs. There are constants with the median design such as the trees and hardscape features and although there is a higher initial investment, the lifecycle cost to maintain the planting in the medians should go down over time. Board – I think this is money well spent. The improvements at College and Willox area are a great example that will have a big impact. Board – The concern is maintenance and replanting of medians has been difficult to fund during budget downturns. Staff – We will be monitoring and testing plants to see what does the best in these locations, and will be doing the best maintenance we can based on available resources. Board – Is the City funding retrofits? Staff – Yes, but we have a priority list and these will be phased in over time. There is not sufficient funding for current medians to be redone to meet the new standards, so it will be a long time before all the medians meet the design standard. Board – What about new development, will developers be responsible for the frontage of the project? Staff – Yes. Board – Since trees are a part of the new design standards has Forestry been involved? Staff – Yes, Tim is a team member giving input on plant adaptability. Board – Were trees included in the budget? Staff – Yes Board – Will there be irrigation designed to handle watering needs during a drought? Staff – As you know we have drip irrigation for the trees in parks for time of drought, and in some medians, so I’m sure we’ll have some system in place in the new median design. Board – When would implementation of the new standards take place? Staff – Some are already taking place, but officially it will be January 15, 2013. Board – Having no further discussion, do we have a motion? Board – I don’t have a motion, but I would say I support the new standards, as long as Council is made aware of the concern for continued funding for maintenance. Parks & Recreation Board Meeting – December 5, 2012 Page 5 of 7 Motion made by Dawn Theis on the Ordinance to Update Appendix C of the Larimer County Urban Area Street Standards Motion: The Parks & Recreation Board supports design guidelines that enhance and represent world-class community Streetscape Standards and Guidelines and encourage Council to take special consideration of the following: • Ongoing funding for proper maintenance after 2014. • Strategies to support local businesses during implementation. • Crisis management strategies during climate or budget challenges. Discussion: None Vote - 7:1 The Board Member with the dissenting opinion offered the following: While I heartily endorse having standards and upgrading the existing standards, I have concerns about the new standards that are proposed. These concerns fall into two areas. First, once initial construction has been completed, the ongoing annual maintenance costs are not inconsequential. An annual cost of $900 for every eighth of a mile just to replace dead plants will add up over time, and that does not include the per foot cost of maintenance of the live plants and beds in the mediums. Second, water is always going to be a concern to people living in Fort Collins; whether or not this coming year will be a drought year or not is irrelevant. Allocating a scarce resource to plants in mediums seems problematic, and potentially objectionable to citizens faced with rationing. Before these standards are adopted, there should be some further study. Which streets are probably going to be brought up to the new standards? What will be the annual maintenance costs for the City once the new standards are implemented? In addition, have low water and/or no water options been thoroughly explored? Retention & Mitigation of Non-Native Trees During Development – Tim Buchanan, City Forester Lindsay Ex, Environmental Planner presented with Tim the Land Use Code Amendments. The current regulations require that any trees that cannot be preserved be mitigated and the mitigation must occur within ¼ mile of the development site. Although trees can be planted on private property, developers are not typically interested in approaching private land owners, so finding public property for planting can be challenging. We are proposing an amendment to the Land Use Code to allow for a tiered approach to allow for more flexibility in finding a place to plant the trees. Tier 1 – within a ½ mile of the developed site; Tier 2 – within 1 mile of the developed site; and Tier 3 – within the City boundaries, but as close to the project site as possible. The other mitigation involves non-native trees. The current regulation requires tree mitigation for certain species if they are in a buffer zone; but other species e.g., Russian olives and Siberian elms are exempt. In some cases, we may want to keep these trees if they are providing habitat; so the proposed amendments would be: 1) Ecological characterization study examines if non-native trees contribute to the site’s habitat, 2) If the trees contribute, then preserve or mitigate; and 3) Mitigation based on replacing value lost, not tree for tree. As an example, if we needed to remove a thicket of Russian olives then we would want to replace it with native trees or habitat that would provide an equivalent type thicket or benefit in order to preserve the habitat; and the native trees provide the most value. Our questions to the Board are: 1) Does the Board support amending the radius for tree mitigation? 2) Does the Board support replacing the ecological value lost from the removal of non-native and other species in development. Discussion Board – Does this code pertain to private and public development? Staff – Yes, however if a tree is deemed unsafe and removed in a park for instances, than we’re not obligated to follow the code in that type instance. Board – The reason I asked was because of all the trees that were removed at the new Transit site. Someone was upset that they removed the trees and I said they would have to replant others; so I was hoping I gave the correct information. Staff – The Code did apply to the South Transit Center and the plan provides for new and mitigation trees. Parks & Recreation Board Meeting – December 5, 2012 Page 6 of 7 Board – Could the City reach out to citizens and have a list of homeowners interested in having a tree planted in their yard? Staff – That’s a great idea. Board – Can the developer provide cash in lieu? Is that part of the amendment? Staff – Some developers have paid us to plant, but we don’t have this as part of the amendment. Board – In Denver we were taking out trees and they valued them at $5,000.00; the trees we replaced were $700.00 so we had to pay the difference in value to the City. Staff – The only time we’ve collected on full appraised value is if there were negligent damage; and we’ve collected on that. Board – Having no other discussion, do we have a motion on the questions? Motion: Does the Board support amending the radius for tree mitigation? Discussion: Should some type of criteria be in place to try to work within the ¼ mile first? The City Forester is not going to allow a tree to even be removed without a compelling need, so I think we can trust that they will do their best to always keep the mitigated trees as close as possible to the development site. Having no further discussion do we have a vote? Vote: 8:0 in support Motion: Does the Board support replacing the ecological value lost from the removal of non-native and other species in development. Discussion None Having no discussion do we have a vote: Vote: 8:0 in support STAFF UPDATES Parks Updates None Recreation Updates • Registration process best last year by about $12,000 and notably 62% registered on-line. Why can’t we register for some classes on line? It’s a system issue that we’re working on. • Neenan has checked and okayed the wall in EPIC that was built in 2005 • The 25th anniversary of Winter Wishes Ice Show will be on December 15 & 16. Park Planning Updates • Woodward’s plan to develop at Lincoln Greens is proceeding through the development review process. I can provide more details in January. • Trail Study information will be presented at the Council work session on December 11. I’ll send a link. It was a good study, nothing “jumping” out but we can read through it and discuss it in January. • Irrigation ditches through town had a study done in the mid-90’s to see if we should combine them, put them in pipes, etc. We are getting a fresh look at ditches as an Action Item in the Parks & Recreation Plan. The team will likely also become a drought team. • There’s talk about a bike park? Yes, the bike community would like to do a park similar to the one in Boulder and they would like to get a velodrome; so I’m working with them to see if they can be a part of the BOB ballot. You’ll start to see information on this early next year. Parks & Recreation Board Meeting – December 5, 2012 Page 7 of 7 Bicycle Advisory Board Liaison Update – Bruce Henderson MPO brought in regional bike plan. They would like to have bike paths from Fort Collins to Berthoud using existing infrastructure where they can. This is just conceptual at this time. Women’s Commission Meeting Update – Ragan Adams Ragan emailed her report to the Board members. Schedule of Articles/Calendar Need a person to write an article for January, it will be due to the Coloradoan on January 2. Dawn will send out information and ideas to the Board for the January, February & March articles. Dawn pulled the Council’s 6 month calendar and didn’t find anything relevant to the P&R Board to attend other than the Trail Study on December 11. Board Work Plan Items Update No Updates Bullet Points • Presentation from the CSU Marketing Class on their intercept survey • Presentation from Pete Wray, Senior City Planner, on the new Streetscape Design Standards & Guidelines • Presentation from Tim Buchanan, City Forester, and Lindsay Ex, Environmental Planner, on Land Use Code Amendments on Tree Mitigation Adjournment: Meeting adjourned 9:15pm. Respectfully submitted, VtÜÉÄ etÇ~|Ç Carol Rankin Administrative Support Supervisor Parks Department Board Approved the minutes, of December 5, 2012 – 7:0 Board Attendance Board Members: Ragan Adams, Richard Barnhart, Rob Cagen, Brian Carroll, Michael Chalona, Todd Galbate, Bruce Henderson, Dawn Theis Staff: Craig Foreman, Carol Rankin, Mike McDonnell, Marty Heffernan Guests: Wendy Ryan, CSU Colorado Climate Center Dr. Gina Mohr and 10 students from CSU Marketing Class Tim Buchanan, City Forester Lindsay Ex, City Environmental Planner Pete Wray, Senior City Planner