The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutMinutes - Legislative Review Committee - 07/11/1996 -Adm ;trative Services ___________ ~•-,••- I I II I~I —-I I —--I .-‘-l •I -I •••I:.I ---~~1~ 300 Laporte Avenue •P0.Box 580 •Fort Collins,CO 80522-0580 (970)221-6790 •FAX (970)221-6329 LEGISLATIVE REVIEW COMMITTEE MEMBERS Council Members Alan Apt Legislative Review Committee Chairperson (970)221-6505 Ann Azari Mayor 221-6505 Bob McCluskey Council Member 221-6505 Staff Members Guy Boyd Director of Administrative Services,221-6570 Poudre Fire Authority Pete Dallow Director of Administrative Services 221-6797 Molly Davis Deputy City Clerk 221-6516 John DeHaes Special Projects Advisor,Light and Power 221-6703 Susanne Edminster Transportation Services Policy Analyst 224-6049 Stewart Ellenberg Risk Manager 221-6774 Marty Heffernan Assistant to the Director of Cultural, Library and Recreational Services 221-6064 Alan Krcmarik Finance Director 221-6788 Blair Leist Legislative Affairs/Assistant to the Director of Administrative Services 221-6796 Jaime Mares Human Resources Director 221-6535 Gale McGaha Miller Water Quality Technical Manager 221-6231 Deryle O’Dell Deputy Chief,Police Services 221-6840 Rondall Phillips Director of Transportation Services 221-6615 Steve Roy City Attorney 221-6520 Tom Shoemaker Natural Resources Director 221-6263 Michael Smith Water/Wastewater Utilities Director 221-6681 Liz Stroh Integrated Resources Manager 221-6522 Tom Vosberg Policy Analyst,Community Planning and Environmental Services 221-6224 Kevin Wilson Fire Marshall,Poudre Fire Authority 221-6570 Brian Woodruff Environmental Planner 221-6604 Legislative Review Committee Council Member-Staff Meeting Meeting Minutes for July 11,1996 Council Attendance:Alan Apt,Bob McCluskey Staff Attendance:Susanne Edminster,Stewart Ellenberg,Jaime Mares,Gale McGaha Miller,Liz Stroh,Sherrie Temple,Tom Vosburg,Kevin Wilson,Blair D. Leist (Recorder) Special Flight Rules in the Vicinity of Rocky Mountain National Park The U.S.Department of Transportation (USDOT)is proposing to establish a Special Federal Aviation Regulation to preserve the natural quiet of RMNP from any potential adverse impact from aircraft-based sightseeing overflights.The USDOT proposes three alternative methods to achieve this goal (see National Park Service attachment).The Larimer County Commissioners have officially requested (see attached letter)that the USDOT adopt Alternative One banning commercial sight-seeing overflights. Commissioner Disney has requested the City Council adopt a resolution supporting the Commissioners’position and supporting Alternative One. Actions To Be Taken:1.Blair Leist will draft a resolution for City Council’s adoption supporting the position of the Larimer County Commissioners and supporting Alternative One. 2.Blair will also draft a letter,for the Mayor’s signature,to be sent to the USDOT supporting Alternative One. II.Candidates Forum and 1997 Legislators Event Several State Senate seats and all of the State House of Representatives are up for election this November.In Larimer County,these seats include the following: State Senate District 14--Bob Schaffer,Incumbent Candidates; Peggy Reeves Democrat Brent C.Eskew Republican State Representative District 49--Bill Jerke,Incumbent Candidates: Daniel W.(Dan)Dean Democrat Steve Johnson Republican State Representative District 51 Candidates: Bill Kaufman Republican,Incumbent Lenard Larkin Democrat State Representative District 52 Steve Tool Republican,Incumbent,Uncontested State Representative District 53--Peggy Reeves,Incumbent Bob Bacon Democrat Thomas Lynch Republican 0 It is important for the City to become familiar with the candidates and their positions. Likewise,it is important for the candidates to become familiar with the City’s positions. For this reason,the LRC will invite all the candidates listed above and those delegates that are not up for reelection to the annual legislators luncheon.This years event will be held sometime between mid September and mid October.Although details are still to be finalized,the luncheon will be a roundtable format in which legislators will be given the opportunity to speak,but will also be informed of City positions. Actions to be Taken:1:Blair will draft a letter for the Mayors signature inviting candidates and legislators to the event and requesting that they indicate dates that they are available. 2.Blair will also extend an invitation to a CML representative. III.Proactive Legislative Strategies The two primary areas of emphasis for the upcoming legislative session will be transportation and takings.A secondary issue to watch closely will be taxation. Transportation:Areas of emphasis will include pedestrian issues,funding of all transportation related needs including alternative modes,and issues that arise from the Blue Ribbon panel including gas taxes and revenue maximization.Details on the process to develop legislation will be forthcoming. Takings:A special committee focusing on the issues of land use/takings will be convened by Governor Romer.CML will be working with this issue and the City will make efforts to have a representative on this committee.It is anticipated that this committee will develop legislation that supports local governments in the land use/takings issues.Additional information will be forthcoming as it is made available IV.Adjourn The meeting adjourned at &23 a.m. Respectfully Submitted this 11th day of July,1996 Blair D.Leist Secretary of Transportation Pefia has announced a PROPOSED rule (or Special Flight Regulation)that could lead to a ban on commercial tour overflights in Rocky Mountain National Park.However,other alternatives have also been suggested as possible approachds,including no action.Therefore,the 90-thy public comment period is absolutely critical and will affect any decision. We strongly encourage individuals and organizations to comment on this proposed rule,even if correspondence or remarks have been submitted previously. PROCESS: Comments on this Notice of Proposed Rule Making (NPRM)should be mailed,in triplicate to: Rules Docket (AGC-200),Docket No.28577 800 Independence Ave.S.?!. Washington,DC 20591.Comments MUST be marked Docket t{o.28577. Remarks can also be sent ~lectronicalIy to the following Internet address:$ flPnncmts@mail.hq.faa.gov. The comment period ends August 7,1996.The Secretary of Transportation will make a decision on a final nzle after the comment period.Please send a copy of your comments to: Superintendent Rocky Mountain National Park Estes Park,CO 80517 PROPOSF:I)AI:FEI4N:vll 4’Es: AlieriwAve One is to BAN commercial aviation sight-seeing tours within the lateral boundaries of Rocky Mountain National Park.General aviation would continue to operate over the Park.The Federal Aviation Administration is specifically seeking comments on whether the nature of air tour operations (low flying,frequent,over key visitor attractions,etc.)justifies banning them. Altengagive Two would allow air tour djerafions,but with various possible restrictions such as requiring them to fly over the existing roads,or during certain months of the year or times of day.Another possible varjatjón would be to restrict such flights to at least 2,000 feet AGL (above ground level).Any of these variations presume some level of tour overflights. Allen,ath’e Three would be to seek voluntary agreements with operators (who do not now exist)to fly only certain routes,etc~Voluntary agreements are strictly self-policed.This approach also presumes some level of overflights wouldexist COMMERCLUL TOUR OVERFLIGHTS: Proposed Rule for Rocky Mountain National Park PARK POSLTION AND KEY PC S: ~rt. The kati&iai Park Service ~heves a BAN oa commercial scenic overflights is the best way to protect park valiies,~the:loca1 en4irohin&ñt and a quality visitor eiperience.We do not propos~to affect the commer cial airlines which fly much hiiher v A BAN only need apply to commercial sight-seeing tour operations. v Much of Rocky Mountain National Park and its unique values can be seen from above on Trail Ridge Road. ..‘Natural quiet is a very significant park resource and must be protected. v Visual and noise intrusions would affect most of the 3 million annual visitors to the Park. 4 r≠ent exit survey indicates that 96 percent of visitors believe “tranquiity’is “extremely impdrianr.to their expe~ience and 81 percent were opposed to tour overflights. .‘Rocky Mountain National Park is Colorado’s number one tourist attraction,and a high quality visitor experience is very impoitant to the local and state economies.Ninety-two percent of the park is r~èommebdecL for wilderness designation. w Other concerns include imp&ts to wildlife,visitor safety,and extreme variations in mountain weather and winds. WHY ALTERNATIVES TWO ANt)THREE WILl.NOT WORK: K Requiring tour aircraft to remain 2,000 feet abo~e ground level is not practical or enforceable. With rapidly changing terrain (from 7,S00to 14,2.55 feet),it would be nearly impossible for aircraft to stay at 2,000 feet AOL And who would monitor this and how could that be done? K Allowing flights to stay over the road system also contradicts our objective,since noise from aircraft is louder and impacts a much larger area.In addition,this route would affect the highest percentage of visitors and the cone of influence of the noise would be much greater than vehicular traffic noise. K Voluntary agreements cannot be enforced and have a questionable track record.The Federal Avia don Administration proposes to recruit operators to enter into an agreement which is contrary to our objective.In addition,even if certain operators agree not to operate over the Park,others could begin at any time,causing the pact to fail.Our intent is to PREVENT tour overflight impacts rather than to mitigate them. K These two alternatives presume some tour overflights which contradict our stated objective which is to protect the natural quiet of RMNP and the quality of our visitor’s experience. CONCLUSION;S The vary strong bi~anisan and wide-ranging public support for a BAN is evident with business interests, Civic organiinions,conservation groups and elected officials at every level of government in agreement. There are no existing commercial tour operations over RMNP and therefore,no businesses that would be harmed j,y aBAN-..Ou thc contrary.we believe low flying commercial tour operations will negatively impact the strong local econoth~r ~nd degrade the local environment.Protecting the natural quiet,wildlife,and other. values of Rocky Motnn2~National Park is paramount.The National Park Service strongly supports a ban on commercial air tours over Rocky Mountain National Park.Any questions may be directed to Sheridan.Steele at (970)586-1202 or Ken Czamowski at (970)586-1263. C May24,1996 Rules Docket (ACC-200),Docket No.28577 800 Independence Ave.S.W.Washington,D.C.20591 We.as the Board of County Commissioners for Larimer County,Colorado would like to submit the following comnients concerning the proposed commercial tour overflight rules for Rocky Mountain National Park,Colorado. Docket No.28577. We strongly favor Alternative One,the total ban of commercial sightseeing aircraft operations over the Park for the following reasons: Rocky Mountain National Park hosts over three million visitors each yeas making it the number one natural tourist attraction in the State of Colorado.These visitors contribute many dollars to the local economy. Therefore,we have a great deal of interest in protecting and enhancing the quality of visitor experience in the Park.Visitor surveys have shown that experiencing the peace,quiet and tranquillity of the natural beauty of the Park is very important.The intrusive noise of frequent tour flights would significantly degrade the opportunity for a visitor to enjoy the natural sounds and landscapes of the Park.Simply stated,we would like visitors to have such an enjoyable experience that they will want to return many times. The eastern slopes of the Front Range of the Rocky Mountains here in Northern Colorado is a relatively arid region.The average rainfall is only IS to 20 inches per year,and,therefore,forest fires are of great concern to us. We feel that a dramatic increase in the numbers of flights coupled with the unique,and often,vezy difficult flying conditions over the Park would substantially increase the likelihood of a crash into one of the heavily timbered slopes.A likely result of such a scenario would be a dangerous and costly forest fire.Larimer County has the responsibility for the costs of fife fighting on any of the private and state owned lands adjacent to the Park. •Wildlife viewing has also been identified as a significant component in the make up of a quality visitor experience.Wildlife biologists have indicated that the noise from frequent tour overflights have a very high potential for detrimental effects on the many wildlife species that inhabit the Park.We, as county commissioners,also place a veiy high priority on the protection of wildlife usa responsibility of local government,and therefore see Alternative One as helping us achieve our goals on the adjacent lands,both public and private,that lie within our jurisdiction outside of the Park. •A commercial tour operation would probably have to base it’s operations on lands outside of the Park boundaries since it is extremely unlikely that such an operation would be permitted inside the Park.La.rimer County is responsible for managing land use on a significant amount of private lands along the eastern border of the Park.It is safe to assume that any attempt to site such an operation in the areas of privately owned lands next to the Park would set off a fire storm of public protest due to the detrimental effects on the property values in a wide area. •Accessability by elderly or handicapped visitors is sometimes claimed as a reason for air tour operations.Rocky Mountain National Park is unique,in that,the road system through the Park and the handicapped trail access allow all visitors an opportunity to experience the entire spectrum of life tones and vistas within the Park. •Alternatives Two and Three are,in our opinion,unacceptable because Two would be difficult,if not impossible,to enforce,and both Two and Three would result in bringing about the conditions we have expressed concerns about in the preceding comments regarding Alternative One. Finally,we would like to thank the Federal Aviation Administration for this opportunity to comment,and to commeBd both the FAA and the National Park Service for their cooperation in working on this very important issue. Sincerely, John Clarke,Chair Larimer County Board of Commissioners