Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutCOUNCIL - AGENDA ITEM - 05/27/2008 - PROPOSED BOXELDER STORMWATER MASTER PLAN AND INTER DATE: May 27, 2008 WORK SESSION ITEM STAFF: Jim Hibbard FORT COLLINS CITY COUNCIL Bob Smith SUBJECT FOR DISCUSSION Proposed Boxelder Stormwater Master Plan and Intergovernmental Agreement. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY In 2004, Council adopted the Stormwater Master Plan for the various drainage basins in the City. This master plan did not include that portion of Boxelder Creek east of 1-25 and identified the need for a regional approach in that area. The Town of Wellington, Latimer County, the City of Fort Collins and representatives from several other agencies formed a team known as the Boxelder Alliance. The Alliance provided funding for the development of a regional master plan. That proposed master plan was completed in late 2006. In addition to the opportunities to enhance the riparian habitat and address erosion along Boxelder Creek identified in the 2004 Master Plan,the proposed 2006 Master Plan recommends$14.7 million in regionally funded flood control projects for the Boxelder Creek Basin. For the past year,the participating jurisdictions have been working on potential ways to implement the regional improvements. The Alliance believes the funding of the regional improvements could be best accomplished through the execution of an intergovernmental agreement(IGA)between the participating jurisdictions to create an authority to fund, own and maintain the regional improvements. Pending City Council direction on this matter,staff will bring an IGA and the proposed Master Plan to City Council for consideration; tentatively scheduled for July 1, 2008. Larimer County and the Town of Wellington are considering this item at work sessions and regular meetings in generally the same time frame. GENERAL DIRECTION SOUGHT AND SPECIFIC QUESTIONS TO BE ANSWERED Should staff continue to work on an intergovernmental agreement(IGA)for stormwater cooperation on Boxelder Creek and adoption of the Boxelder Regional Stormwater Master Plan? BACKGROUND Stormwater master plans include: • Guidance for enhancements to the riparian habitat along stream corridors to improve water quality, May 27, 2008 Page 2 • Recommended projects to reduce flood damage to homes and businesses, the potential for loss of life, as well as reduce flooding of roads, • Guidance for new development in the basin, and • Guidance for stabilizing streams where necessary. Master plans strive to provide cost-effective flood protection for both structures and infrastructure in a 100-year rainfall event. In many cases, projects reduce the floodplain on undeveloped land. This usually occurs when the problem is downstream of undeveloped land and the solution is upstream. New development in a floodplain is required to adhere to floodplain regulations. In 1995, Council adopted a resolution formalizing a strategy to protect and enhance stormwater quality and to provide a framework to meet federal permit requirements for municipal stormwater systems. The approach combines appropriate techniques to: (1)prevent pollution on land surfaces; (2) design local drainage systems to treat or mitigate polluted runoff, and (3) protect and restore aquatic, wetland and stream-side habitats in receiving waters. The drainage master plans integrate the protection and restoration of aquatic habitat in receiving waters into the technical analyses and alternatives evaluation. In 2003, the City obtained a stormwater discharge permit to meet the requirements of the Federal Nation Pollution Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) Phase II regulations. Protection and restoration of aquatic habitat in order to improve water quality in receiving waters are components of this permit. Larimer County and the City of Fort Collins prepared the original floodplain study for the basin in 1981. In 2002, Fort Collins Utilities, in cooperation with Larimer County, revised the floodplain map as part of the floodplain map update associated with the change in the rainfall standard. In 2004, City Plan identified various principals and policies regarding Boxelder Creek. Following is a brief summary of those adopted principals and policies. • City will preserve and protect natural areas in the 100-year floodplain of Boxelder Creek and at the same time provide a balance between the environmental protection and economic development of floodplain lands. • F000dplain "breakout" areas, such as the area of Boxelder Creek that is outside of the primary creek corridor along Interstate 25,will allow development in accordance with City floodplain regulations. • Water corridors, such as Boxelder Creek, would help define the edges of our community, form parts of community separators and other open lands, in addition to serving their primary function as drainage corridors. • A primary off-street "greenway" will be located along Boxelder Creek establishing an important connection between neighborhoods, employment areas, an activity center, and other areas. This trail facility will be designed and located in accordance with both the City's Parks and Recreation Policy Plan and Natural Areas Policy Plan. May 27, 2008 Page 3 • Boxelder Creek will be enhanced,restoring the native vegetation,providing wildlife habitat, and restoring the channel's topography to naturally meandering plains stream corridor protected by natural features buffer zone adequate for preserving the drainage as a natural feature. • The Boxelder drainage will be protected and enhanced. In 2004,City Council adopted the stormwater basin Master Plan for the Boxelder basin west of I-25. A master plan for the portion of the basin east of I-25 was not adopted because of the need to develop a regional approach with adjacent government agencies. The City's Economic Action Plan identified the values of sustainability and economic health strengthened through community partnerships and collaborations. At a June 12,2007 City Council work session on the Economic Action Plan,the regional stormwater approach in the Boxelder Basin was sited as an example of being proactive on economic issues through infrastructure investments that support economic health. The Proposed 2006 Boxelder Creek Regional Stormwater Master Plan The proposed Master Plan contains $14.7 million in regional flood control projects to be funded jointly by the participating agencies. The characteristics of the Boxelder Basin, the history of the basin, the potential for damages, and the proposed improvements are summarized in the attached Summary of Proposed 2006 Boxelder Creek Regional Stormwater Master Plan (Attachment 1). Intergovernmental Agreement for Stormwater Cooperation The City of Fort Collins, Larimer County and the Town of Wellington, along with representatives from the Colorado Department of Transportation, private property owners, the Colorado Water Conservation Board, the Boxelder Sanitation District and two irrigation and reservoir companies formed a team known as the Boxelder Alliance to provide funding and direction for the development of the Master Plan. The Boxelder Alliance envisions a stormwater authority to jointly fund,build,own and maintain the regional stormwater facilities in the Boxelder Creek Basin. An intergovernmental agreement(IGA) between the participating agencies would form the authority. The regional stormwater improvements will benefit the Town of Wellington, Larimer County, the City of Fort Collins and the Town of Timnath. Although Timnath did participate in the development of the Master Plan,as of this date they have advised the Alliance that they will not be participating due to timing issues and plan to address the overflow through their town independently of the Alliance. Staff is still attempting to convince Timnath the value ofparticipating with Wellington,Larimer County and Fort Collins. During the development of the Master Plan,various ways to fund the regional improvements were explored. The selected option was a regional stormwater authority supported by a monthly stormwater fee on developed properties and the collection of a plant investment fee when properties develop. The City of Fort Collins has a stormwater utility to fund stormwater improvements. Both Wellington and Larimer County have expressed an interest in their own stormwater utility. It is envisioned that properties located both in the City of Fort Collins and the proposed stormwater May 27, 2008 Page 4 authority would not pay two stormwater fees. Instead, the City would use a portion of its stormwater fees collected in the Boxelder Basin to pay the authority for the City's share of the regional improvements. Wellington has expressed a similar approach to its fees. A rate study is currently underway to determine each jurisdictions appropriate share, the optimum level for the authority's fees and the timing of the improvements in the basin. Some of the key concepts envisioned for the IGA are anticipated to be: • An authority would be formed to fund the design, construction and maintenance of the regional stormwater improvements; • The authority is envisioned primarily as a funding mechanism, not as another significant layer of government with multiple employees; • Each participating jurisdiction would pay their fair share toward the improvements based on the developed area of that jurisdiction in the basin; • Fort Collins would pay its share from existing stormwater utility fees collected in the basin; • Wellington and Larimer County would enact new fees for their share of the improvements; • A board of directors,with representation from each participating jurisdiction would provide direction for the authority; • The initial IGA will not contain the rate details of the authority. Once proposed by the authority's board of directors, unanimous approval from participating jurisdictions would be required to approve the fees of the authority. Pending work session direction from City Council, City staff will work with the staff of the other participating jurisdictions to prepare an IGA for consideration. For the City of Fort Collins, this consideration is tentatively set for the July 1, 2008 meeting. City Council was updated on this Master Plan on January 14,2008 in a memorandum from staff(Attachment 2).Larimer County and the Town of Wellington are considering this item at work sessions and regular meetings in generally the same time frame. Public Outreach The process of informing property owners located in the basin during the development of the Master Plan began in early 2005 and continues today. A variety of communication tools such as customer mailings, web pages, press releases, media interviews, public and one-on-one meetings, open houses, and outreach to both internal and external groups were used. During the development of the Master Plan,the Alliance met on a monthly basis. These meetings were open to the public with many interested parties attending. Open houses were held and newsletters were mailed to properties located in the basin throughout the development of the Master Plan. Also,property owners and key entities did have a representative on the Alliance and were an integral part in the development of the Master Plan. May 27, 2008 Page 5 A second phase of the outreach program is being initiated by Larimer County and the Town of Wellington regarding the formation of their stonnwater utilities. City Boards and Commissions The Water Board discussed this matter at its April 2008 meeting and an excerpt of the minutes is included in this packet(Attachment 3). The Natural Resources Advisory Board discussed this matter at its April and May 2007 meetings and passed a recommendation for adoption. A letter with that recommendation and an excerpt of the minutes is included in this packet (Attachment 4). The Planning and Zoning Board discussed this item at its May 2007 work session. That discussion was in support of the Master Plan. The Land Conservation and Stewardship Board discussed this item at its May 2008 meeting and an excerpt of the minutes is attached(Attachment 5). Both the Planning and Zoning Board and the Water Board would like to see Timnath be a participating jurisdiction. Pre-Disaster Mitigation Grant Application Several years ago, the City of Fort Collins received a Pre-Disaster Mitigation Grant (PDM) for improvements on Spring Creek. PDM's are proactive grants from the Federal Emergency Management Agency(FEMA)and are designed to solve problems before disasters happen. A PDM grant can provide up to 75%of the funding for a$4 million project when there is a$1 million local match. Larimer County made an application for a PDM grant to fund one of the regional detention areas near Wellington. The grant would reduce the funding needed from the participating jurisdictions. In order to accept this grant,the participating jurisdictions would be required to come up with the local match. After discussions with the Alliance,the County elected to make application for the PDM grant because opportunities for grants may be limited in the near future due to changing priorities at the federal level. The County was just notified the application had been selected for the next level of the selection process. Pre-award activities include completion of environmental and historic preservation compliance reviews and the confirmation matching funds are available. The City, Wellington and the County have the matching funds available in existing budgets. Items to Consider Concerning a Regional Approach in the Boxelder Basin • Execution of an IGA would formalize ongoing informal cooperation between jurisdictions. • By working together, the goals of each jurisdiction can be accomplished more efficiently. • At the present time,although the Town of Timnath would benefit from the regional facilities, it has declined to participate. • Creation of an authority would create a vehicle to receive the current PDM grant and potential fixture grants. • Participating jurisdictions would retain financial control, as each jurisdiction would have to approve authority rates. May 27, 2008 Page 6 • The authority is focused on the projects that have regional benefits. Each agency retains control over its local improvements. • Successful execution of the IGA would ensure each participating jurisdiction pays its fair share. • There are economic benefits to removing undeveloped agricultural lands along I-25 from the floodplain. • The 2004 Master Plan protects and enhances the natural functions of Boxelder Creek. • The maintenance of regional improvements would be shared by participating jurisdictions. • The Land Conservation and Stewardship Board did raise a concern that removing the floodplain may increase the cost of land. ATTACHMENTS 1. Summary of Proposed 2006 Boxelder Creek Regional Stormwater Master Plan. 2. Update Memo to Council dated January 14, 2008. 3. Water Board Meeting Excerpt and Member Comments. 4. Natural Resources Advisory Board Letter and Meeting Excerpts. 5. Land Conservation and Stewardship Board Meeting Excerpt. 6. Power Point Presentation. ATTACHMENT 1 Summary of Proposed 2006 Boxelder Creek Regional Stormwater Master Plan About the Basin Boxelder Creek and its tributaries flow generally from north to south, draining a 266 square mile watershed extending from southern Wyoming to its confluence with the Cache la Poudre River southeast of Fort Collins. (Figure 1 : Boxelder Creek Basin) . The basin is primarily farmland with areas of residential and commercial development in the Town of Wellington, Larimer County, the City of Fort Collins and the Town of Timnath. The basin has a history of flooding and is impacted by numerous existing man- made structures such as irrigation canals, roads and culverts. Storm runoff from the upper 186 square miles of the basin is controlled by a series of flood control structures built by the Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS) in the 1960s . However, the lower 80 square miles of the basin generates a substantial amount of runoff that contributes to flooding along Boxelder Creek and its tributaries on both sides of I-25 . Larimer County and the City of Fort Collins prepared the original floodplain study for the basin in 1981 . In 2002, Fort Collins Utilities in cooperation with Larimer County revised the floodplain map as part of the floodplain map update associated with the change in the rainfall standard. There are approximately 5 ,000 acres in the floodplain, crossing the jurisdictions of Wellington, Larimer County, Fort Collins, and Timnath. (Figure 2 : Existing Floodplain) . Flooding History Storm drainage problems have long plagued the Boxelder Creek watershed, particularly the developing area from just north of the Town of Wellington to just south of Timnath. Major floods occurred in this basin in 1909, 19225 1930, 1937, 1947, 1963 , 1967 and 1969 . In 1947 , a Coloradoan newspaper headline read, "Violent Rainstorm Floods Large Area; Crop Losses Heavy. " As much as five (5) inches of rain fell northwest of Wellington, washing out bridges and flooding crops. Nearly 1 ,000 acres of grain, alfalfa and corn crops were damaged. On June 5 , 1967, the headlines in the Coloradoan read, "Another Auto Plunges into Boxelder". Heavy rains caused Boxelder Creek to overflow its banks and resulted in the death of a mother and her three daughters who drove into the flooded creek where it passed over a county road south of Wellington. Floods that summer destroyed county bridges seven times. Basin Problems The proposed 2006 master plan estimates that 670 structures will be damaged during a 100-year storm event. There are also 33 roads in the basin that will be overtopped by up to 2 feet during a 100-year storm. If nothing is done to mitigate flood damage, it is estimated that $ 110 million of damage will occur over the next 50 years . In addition to structural flood damages, there are also adverse impacts such as personal injury and loss of life, stream instability, adversely impacted riparian habitat and water 1 quality, road overtopping, clean-up costs, emotional effects, etc. The master plan does not include any damage estimates for any of these indirect damages. There are also several critical structures within the 100-year floodplain, including two schools in Wellington, and two gas stations and a liquid propane storage facility near the City of Fort Collins . Recommended Solutions The 2004 master plan adopted by Council contains opportunities to enhance the riparian habitat and address erosion along Boxelder Creek. This includes constructing sloping boulder drop structures, sloping back vertical banks and re-establishing native landscaping to promote biological diversity along the stream. The goal is to preserve areas with good habitat and enhance areas of poor habitat. These improvements will be implemented when adjacent properties develop. These opportunities are unchanged by the proposed 2006 master plan. The proposed 2006 master plan includes $ 14 . 7 million in regional flood control projects to be funded jointly by the participating agencies . (Figure 3 : Recommended Solutions). These regional facilities include : • Two proposed regional detention facilities located near the Town of Wellington, one in Clark Reservoir, an existing irrigation reservoir and Edson, a new detention facility, • Improvements in the overbank area near County Road 54 , and • A siphon under the Larimer & Weld Canal. These recommended improvements reduce the potential for flood damages along Coal Creek in Wellington, eliminate the floodplain along a flow split adjacent to 1-25 , reduce flows across I-25 into the Cooper Slough basin, and reduce an overflow in and near the Town of Timnath. The recommended improvements are sized to remove the overflow adjacent to I-25 while not impacting the floodplain along Boxelder Creek itself. The proposed 2006 master plan also contains recommendations for non-regional or local improvements (primarily road crossing improvements) funded by Wellington and Larimer County. The plan significantly reduces the damages to structures caused by flooding. Staff estimates flood damage will be eliminated on approximately 306 structures, and 33 road crossings would no longer be over topped. The proposed improvements have an overall benefit to cost ratio of approximately L8 to 1 . Approximately 2 ,670 acres of land would be removed from the floodplain including approximately 1 ,410 acres of undeveloped property. 2 WYCAIING -�----- ----_ - ----- - ------ ----- - ----- - ----- - ----- - ----- COLORADO I LARMIER ;' WELD I � i CID � I z I i i I i i I I i I NU FLN I bVE IN N , I I FWY 1 I r i I I C 1ti I i I I i MULBERRY STREET 7- FORT COLLINS SEN 9CE �r r� vmw$o rY Figure 1 : Boxelder Creek Basin 3 i i BoxelderlCooper Slough Floodplain I mommoomm , City Limits = COOPER SLOUGH BOXELDER BASIN I = Urban Grovuth Area Boundary i FEMA High Risk Floodplains I FEMA Moderate Risk Floodplain , k COUNTY ROAD 66 i oj' i �1 � rOrI G� 3 I I �s 1 WE LLIN GTON COUNTY ROAD 62 cc I I I - I CJ I w I COUNTY ROAD 58 iL 1 w I 2 i 1 i I I t r i I Z � I O r;r DOUGLAS RE) _ E COUNTY ROAD54 E DO U D ., .1 !• .._� IN us HIGH O W Ilk, / RI LHARDS .L,04: E RD qy Y a� . ._.. � ._. ._.. _ ..��•:� ,p cr . r 16? o fe I C0LJ)4TRYCLLJB �_ l r n / ., i.ltirf o 7. In W IILLOXIK I, E wl � Lpk`�•1u Q E COLJJLTY ROAD 50 am a ffillilld �N o �. w j< 1 MOUNTAIN VISTA. DR I �_. ._ to �.._.. w z W 1 r . l w •. j j • jrJ� `40 i NElD S3. _ N z 1 ; � � E-0VrNEDR - pit n s LmIA LAPORTE AVE % �� �, •_e � .•�w l 1 I W MLJLE ERRY ST A \ I w rr. } ~ iQ % E V-1 L E; E •� R �n i O W • Z -J c7 w 9`F y "r: .� r l I I v a z '•:�s i, i rn w � PR CT SF)E RD • � 'D r FORTCOLLINS Figure 2 : Existing Floodplain 4 i i Recommended Regional IrnproVernents = ft •; Limits I Q COOPER SLOUGHIBOXELDER BASIN i Urban Growth Area Boundary = I rl. F'. Z-r.rir FE MA High Risk Floodplains i FE MA Moderate Risk Floodplain I REGIONAL IMPROVEMENTS COUNTYROAD66 I 1 I I 1 i 11 WELLINGTON COUNTY ROAD 62 j i i i i ,•. I I - r � � I COUNTY ROAD 58 I dificat ion to Boxdder pp :5adrfi _,tion t� Bo>::d der ^ I i Cn-� k O •.FrGs� k DOUGLAS RD —J i E DOUGLJQS `, t G 4 N HIGFI . Rli'HARDE; LAKE RD 1� r w iU : n i . ONTRYCLUB RD z Ul In w d W W ILLOX,"* E WIILp vas- 11 TY F� Ab 50 w "%6A X �Nf< C� E CO O Is FAOUNT.41N VISTA 0R VIM IN 11me w 4y ( . _.7 w ' J �. ._..a _ .� J z i i �} ,Y� • _ � I �1NElD � . � 1 1 INEDR N L. a �_iphrn iini�r Lsi ri ins i H r� E �♦ if. z }�t LAPORTE AVE 1 �,* `� q y , • W MULBERRY S7 z_' �f ��r ♦•' ` r 1118 w „ G� Q tlLd w aloe —=-� � w J ifi � I N Le pop FORTCOLL INS � P S GTRD o i N Figure 3 : Recommended Solutions 5 ATTACHMENT 2 ` ^ Utillties electric • stormwater • wastewater • water ggo. 700 Wood Street PO Box 580 Fort Collins, CO 80522 City of Fort Collins gto.2z1 .s7oo 970.221 .6619 - fax 970.224.6003 - TDD . . . . . .. ... . utilities@fcgov.com kgov.comlUdIities MEMORANDUM DATE : January 14, 2008 TO: Darin Atteberry, City Manager THRU: Brian Janonis, Fort Collins Utilities Executive Director Jim Hibbard, Water Field Operations and Planning Manager FROM: Bob Smith, Water Planning & Development Manado ger RE: Stormwater Master Plan Updates Upper Cooper Slough and Boxelder Creek The Boxelder Creek drainage basin extends from north of Wellington to the Poudre River, along the Interstate 25 corridor. When the City' s current Stormwater Master Plan was adopted in 2004, improvements for this area were not included due to the need for a master plan with a regional perspective. The Cooper-Slough basin extends from north of the Anheuser Busch plant site south to Prospect Road along the west side of Interstate 25 . Although the 2004 Stormwater Master Plan included improvements for the Cooper Slough drainage basin, there were no details for the portion of the basin north of the Larimer-Weld Canal due to the largely undeveloped nature of the area. As development interest in this area has grown, details of the master plan improvements were developed. Upper Cooper Slough Master Plan Enhancements The original master plan for the Cooper Slough basin was adopted in 2004. Since that time, more detailed information was developed for that portion of the basin north of the Larimer-Weld Canal. This information provides direction for new development and identifies improvements necessary to prevent the overtopping of existing roadway, railroad and irrigation canals. Development of the master plan included discussions with key property owners in the basin and discussions with City Boards and .Commissions. Per City Code, this master plan update was considered an enhancement to the already adopted master plan for Copper Slough and was approved by the Utilities Executive Director in August of 2007, Representatives from Anheuser Busch have requested this master plan update be affirmed by City Council. In response to this request, staff will be scheduling the Upper Cooper Slough Master Plan for Council consideration this spring. where renewal is a way of life r Ut"ctric • stormwater • wastewater • water Wood Street Box 684 Fort Collins, CO 80522 City of Fort Collins 970.221 .6700 970 . 221 .6619 - fax 970.224.6003 - TDD ufififies@fcgov. com fcgo v.corrVutifities Boxelder Creek Regional Stormwater Master Plan The Boxelder Creek Regional Stormwater Master Plan was developed under the direction of a group of interested parties referred to as The Boxelder Alliance (The Alliance). The Alliance is coordinated by Larimer County and includes representatives from the Towns of Wellington, Tin-math and Windsor, Larimer County, the Colorado Department of Transportation, the Colorado Water Conservation Board, Boxelder Sanitation District, the City of Fort Collins , private land owners and two irrigation and reservoir companies. During the development of the master plan, newsletters were mailed and open houses were held. The Alliance met on a regular basis with all interested parties encouraged to attend. The proposed regional improvements include two upstream flood control storage facilities , improvements in over-bank areas along the stream channel and at major road crossings. Consistent with the Fort Collins City Plan document, Boxelder Creek is recommended to remain in its natural condition. Benefits of the improvements recommended in the master plan out weigh the costs of the improvements by a ratio of about 2 to L Both Larimer County and Wellington have adopted the master plan. As part of the master plan' s development, funding sources were researched. Included in the master plan is the recommendation of forming a Stormwater Authority (The Authority) to fund and oversee the implementation of the regional components of the master plan. An inter-governmental agreement (IGA) between various local entities is envisioned to create the Stormwater Authority, The Alliance is currently working on drafting a conceptual IGA. Several years ago, the City of Fort Collins received a Pre-Disaster Mitigation (PDM) Grant for improvements on Spring Creek. Larimer County is preparing a similar PDM grant for a component of the master plan near the Town of Wellington. By dredging materials from Clark Reservoir and increasing its capacity, flooding in Wellington would be greatly reduced and would provide a key first step in achieving the goals . of the regional master plan. Larimer County plans to make the PDM application early this year with possible notice of award by FEMA later this summer. Because of the potential benefits to downstream properties, including the City of Fort Collins, City staff indicated preliminary support for the PDM application, subject to City Council approval of the master plan and possible IGA. Staff is planning to present the Boxelder Regional Stormwater Master Plan and possible IGA to City Council at a work session this spring, where renewal is a way of life ATTACHMENT 3 DRAFT Excerpt Fort Collins Utilities Water Board Minutes Thursday, April 24, 2008 Water Board Chairperson City Council Liaison Doug Yadon, 484-3611 David Roy Water Board Vice Chairperson Staff Liaison Gina Janett, 493 -4677 Robin Pierce, 221 -6702 Roll Call Board Present Chairperson Doug Yadon, Vice Chairperson Gina Janett, Steve Balderson, Mike Connor, Johannes Gessler, David Pillard and Gary Wockner Board Absent John Bartholow, Eileen Dornfest, Phil Phelan and Reagan Waskom Staff Present Brian Janonis, Bob Smith, Marsha Hilmes-Robinson, Dennis Bode, Carol Webb, Carrie Daggett, Jim Hibbard, Terri Bryant, Kevin Gertig, Susan Hayes, Brian Varrella and Robin Pierce Meeting Convened Chairperson Doug Yadon called the meeting to order at 5 : 17 p.m. Citizen Participation None Minutes of March 27, 2008 Board Member Mike Connor moved to approve the minutes from the March 27, 2008 , meeting. Board Member Steve Balderson seconded the motion, and it passed unanimously. Boxelder Master Plan The Boxelder Master Plan is scheduled to go before Council at the May 27 Work Session. Staff is seeking direction from the Board to make certain they represent the thoughts of the Board when the plan is presented. Action is tentatively scheduled for the July 1 Council Regular Meeting. Planning and Development Manager Bob Smith provided an overview of the history and issues surrounding Boxelder Creek and neighboring Coal and Indian Creeks . These creeks create a floodplain where all three converge next to 1-25 below Wellington. Boxelder has a long history of incidents with flood waters causing property damages, crop damages and deaths . There are 670 structures and about 5 ,000 acres in the floodplain. Many structures were built in the area before the floodplain was identified. Mr. Smith pointed out the relationship of Boxelder Creek to the Fort Collins city limits and growth management area. The floodplain on Boxelder Creek was updated in 2002, at the same time that the City-wide master plan was being done. The master plan was adopted in 2004 without recommending improvements to mitigate the flooding along Boxelder Creek. A stability analysis was performed on Boxelder Creek, including erosion buffer limits and improvements needed to mitigate damages . A regional alliance with Wellington and Larimer County was formed, resources were pooled to hire a consultant, and the master plan that is being presented was the result. The plan has been adopted by Wellington and Larimer County, and implementation planning is underway. Fort Collins has not adopted the master plan as yet until cost, fee and fair share discussions can take place . Larimer County submitted a Pre-Disaster Mitigation (PDM) Grant through FEMA for Clark Reservoir (a related improvement project) this year. Notification on the grant is expected in late May to early June. There may be an opportunity for a second grant for the Edson Detention Storage Site to eliminate the flows into Cooper Slough, if the grant program is still in place. The window of opportunity for this program is diminishing. The funds are becoming more competitive and, in some cases, are being earmarked for other projects . Larimer County is the lead agency that applied for the grant, and they are hoping this regional alliance can be created to receive the grant, and therefore take on the obligation of the local match. If City Council does not vote to proceed with the alliance, the County by itself probably doesn't have the local match and may have to turn down the grant. In that scenario, Wellington may decide to proceed on their own since they receive significant benefit. Board Member Wockner asked for clarification on estimate of damages. These are based on 100- year floods . The present worth figure represents a compilation of all floods, typically across 50 years, not just 100-year events or 2-year events. Based on feedback from technical and financial advisory committees , the alliance is recommending an alternative based on regional storage and conveyance . Mr. Smith provided an overview of Phase 1 and Phase 2 of the project. Phases 2 and 3 deal with infrastructure. The project would divert flow from Coal Creek to Clark Reservoir, and 100-year peak flow was portrayed with a map of before and after project volumes . The Edson site is in the Indian Creek vicinity. This project requires both sites to accomplish the end goals . Improvements have been sized to reduce the Wellington area floodplain and eliminate the flow along 1-25 , while retaining the flows of Boxelder Creek on its historic path. CDOT is opting out of being part of the alliance, but will be performing work on culverts along 1-25 . The alliance has deliberated carefully about communities that will benefit from the project without participating in it financially, such as Timnath. 2 Mr. Smith covered potential funding sources . Board Member Connor would like all other options to be considered before looking at funding through bonds . It is envisioned that an Inter-Governmental Agreement (IGA) would be composed of representatives from each entity: Wellington Town Board, City Council, Larimer County and citizen representatives . The IGA sets the foundation for exact numbers to gain commitment of all parties . A rate study is currently underway and is looking at imperviousness across the whole basin for the Phase 1 improvements (generation of stormwater determines what fees are assessed to single-family homes versus commercial customers) . Wellington intends to have a stormwater fee in place to address the Coal Creek issue but also help solve other local needs . Fort Collins Utilities would not increase rates; it would use an apportionment in the budget of existing fees collected. Vice Chairperson Janett asked about the undeveloped land in the area that will be moved out of the floodplain where housing or other development may eventually occur. Raw land is not charged fees, and this initiative would provide the option for development and new structures . Mr. Hibbard responded that when undeveloped land develops, it would be required to pay plant investment fees and then also begins paying monthly fees. Rate of development can determine how quickly loans are paid off. If a property develops in the area before the improvements are in place, the development would have to comply with floodplain regulations . In addition, the developer would have to channelize the approximately 3 ,000 cfs flows along I-25 via culverts, including every road crossing. The flow split would continue to happen, and properties in the area would have to figure out how to channelize the overflow. Our current strategy with Larimer County and Wellington envisions forming this authority with the County Commissioners, and our City Council would retain authority to review rates. The County wants to have a receptacle to put the money into . If the County does not receive the grant, we still want to form the regional entity as a basis for cooperation and a way to formalize working together on studies and alternatives . Staff would like to know the Board' s concerns, and what they ' d like staff to look more closely at before we go any further. The concerns of the Board may well be reflective of the same concerns that Council may have . Board Member Johannes Gessler is concerned about Timnath ' s absence in the plan. From the technical side, staff has a very convincing reason to proceed. Board Member Wockner noted that this is framed as an effort to prevent damage. What part of the discussion was about bringing developable land out of the floodplain? Mr. Smith responded that it was recognized as one of the benefits . We could not address the problems in Cooper Slough without that occurring. There were also discussions at the Council level on economic development and the I-25 corridor zoning plan. Board Member Wockner feels that aspect should be brought forward and readily identified as the primary reason for this project. Chairperson Yadon noted residents who have not yet benefited from stormwater programs are paying the fees . This would be the first opportunity for the County to participate, but overall, health and safety are driving this project. Mr. Hibbard noted that the purpose of the stormwater program is 3 not narrowly defined in the City Code as only protecting existing structures . It is there to protect natural habitat, economic blight and facilitate development. Board Member Wockner suggested inserting a slide with the number of acres of developable land if this project goes forward, citing a development focus . Board Member Connor also would like the safety factor portrayed, i . e. history of deaths by drowning when flows have crested. It would also be good to break out what is being facilitated by Phase 1 versus the rest of the phases. Board Member Balderson would clarify who is going to facilitate these projects and staff costs associated with administration of the project. Vice Chairperson Janett asked about the recommendations of the Natural Resources Board. Mr. Smith confirmed that adoption was recommended as long as the project was compatible with the City Plan. They also recommended the properties in the floodplain pay higher fees than properties outside the floodplain. The group has deliberated on a method for basing that additional cost, i. e. land use, etc. Chairperson Yadon noted the public might not grasp that development can still take place without going forward with this plan. Board Member David Pillard asked how this ranks with other potential projects and stormwater needs in terms of population density. Mr. Hibbard addressed this question. If this is being looked at as limited to a City project, it would not be a high priority. However, when ranking projects, Fort Collins Utilities has always talked about the opportunity for regional cooperation and public and private partnerships . The City' s share of the local match for the grant at $200,000-300,000 might be better spent elsewhere if this were solely a City project. However, the chance to leverage it with the FEMA grant and also engage the County to at last establish a stormwater utility is a benefit to the City that outweighs the option to spend it elsewhere . While this project is limited to this particular basin, it sets an important precedent for bringing the County along to participate in other areas in the future. Board Member Wockner asked if we are approaching the Boxelder floodplain differently than the policy we use to deal with the Poudre River. Buffer zones on the Poudre River are 300 feet, and buffers on natural creeks are 100 feet. The plan for Boxelder Creek itself is to correct some stability issues and leave it as natural as possible. There are differences in floodplain regulations between the Poudre River and streams . It' s a different type of flood; therefore a different emphasis is placed on the river. The Poudre River floodplain regulations are stricter than those for Spring Creek, Fossil Creek and Boxelder Creek. Council felt the risks are higher with the river. Mr. Smith clarified we ' re not sending the flood elsewhere; we are storing the water and releasing it at a controlled rate. This item will be on the June Water Board agenda in preparation for the Council regular meeting on July 1 . Staff will ask for a Board recommendation at that time . Board members are free to share ongoing thoughts and additional remarks in the next two weeks via e-mail sent to the entire Board. Feedback in the next two weeks would be helpful to staff as they prepare for the May 27 4 Work Session presentation. Chairperson Yadon noted that in sharing feedback in this manner, opinions expressed are those of individual Board members . The Board has not made any official recommendation on the item at this time . 5 Gary Wockner FC Water Board member (these comments are from Gary Wockner, and should not be suggested as representing the entire board) April 25 , 2008 Comments on the Boxelder Creek Regional Stormwater Master Plan (These comments are a requested response to the presentation given to the Fort Collins water board by FC Stormwater Utility staff on April 24, 2008 about the proposed Boxelder Creek Regional Stormwater Master Plan. These comments have been given to the Water Board and the Stormwater Utility staff.) General Systemic Comments : The staff presentation was heavily peppered with language and "framing" suggesting that the "problem that needs to be fixed" is with "nature. " In specific, it was suggested that nature — in this case, flooding and stormwater — causes "problems and damage ." Instead, I ' d argue that the problem is that people have developed commercial and residential property directly inside of the Box Elder Creek floodplain. It is even more true that people want to develop the I-25 corridor (much of which is within the Box Elder Creek floodplain) , and so the problem is between our plan for the future of the area and between nature ' s former plan for the area (see point #5 below) . In my opinion, the problem is not with "nature," but rather with "land- use" and "human development patterns. " Box Elder Creek and its floodplain are doing what they have always done for thousands of years — the problem started when people began living, building houses and roads, and farming within the Creek' s floodplain. When you build in a floodplain, damage happens . The necessary outcome to implement the Plan may not be any different, but is important to describe the problem accurately. I ' d suggest that this is an institutionalized (and not uncommon) problem in the way that many people view the role between humans and nature . Specific Comments : 1 . The entire presentation was described as a way to "fix" the damage caused by flooding/stormwater in Box Elder Creek all along the I-25 corridor. While the damage is certainly real and quantifiable, it is a matter of debate whether the citizens of Fort Collins should prioritize this damage as an economic necessity for multi- million dollar expenditures. More specifically: a. Staff discussed the damage to "crops" raised by farmers . Are these crops/farms even in the City ' s GMA, let alone annexed by the City? Additionally, these farmers have been farming these farms for generations (or longer), and it is a matter of debate whether the citizens of Fort Collins should now step forward and protect these crops/farms from Box Elder Creek flooding. b. Staff discussed the damage to houses and structures . Again, many of these homes/structures have existed for decades, and it is a matter of debate whether the citizens of Fort Collins should now step forward and protect these homes/structures from Box Elder Creek flooding. 6 c . A "loss of life" threat due to flooding was discussed as a reason to invest in the Box Elder Creek Stormwater plan. The FC Water Board was told that four people died because they drove a car on a flooded road in the area in 1967 (this information is even highlighted on the City' s website : http ://fcgov.com/stonnwater/db-cooper.php) . The prudence of the need to spend several million dollars to attempt to reduce the statistical probability of this loss of life is a matter of debate. As a way to minimize loss of life in Fort Collins, citizen dollars might be much better spent investing in City-wide flu shots, or in education about the benefits of exercise, or in education about the health risks associated with smoking tobacco . If "loss of life" is a primary concern of City government policies (and I ' d suggest it should be), then I ' d suggest that the City government embark on a cost/benefit analysis of how money is spent in terms of a "loss of life" parameter — again, as just one example, it could be that City-wide City-subsidized flu shots are a much more economically beneficial way to spend taxpayer/ratepayer dollars wherein hundreds of lives might be saved over a decade. 2 . Staff said that "Box Elder Creek would be protected" if the project was built. Again, as in the general comment above, this suggests that the Box Elder Creek floodplain is not a part of the Creek, but rather is some kind of unnatural abnormality. Conversely, what is actually true is that creeks — all rivers and creeks everywhere — have floodplains that are natural features of the riparian corridor. By completely draining the floodplain, we certainly would not be "protecting" the creek; in fact, we would be damaging the creek. What the Plan basically does is re-route most of the stormwater into reservoirs, and channelize portions of the Creek and the ditches leading away from the Creek. I ' d argue that this project may protect people and property (and future development) from the Creek, but it won 't protect the Creek — it will, rather, dramatically alter the landscape, including the floodplain, all of which was formerly known as "Box Elder Creek and Floodplain." 3 . The Creek' s floodplain seems to be treated entirely different than that of the Poudre River' s floodplain. For example, we don' t attempt to drain all of the 100-year floodplain of the Poudre River, but we are suggesting that we do this for the Creek (as we have done for other creeks, such as Spring Creek) . Why is the Creek treated differently than the River? Is it less worthy? Is it because "fixing the problem" with the Creek would cost less than fixing the river? Is it because it has a higher development potential because it is along 1-25 ? 4. The presentation did not include any of the other alternatives reviewed by the Stormwater Utility. Because I am new on the Water Board and because I do not attend engineering subcommittee meetings, it may be that these alternatives have been discussed previously. Still, I ' d suggest that the presentation to the Council also briefly discuss these alternatives including : a. a "null" alternative that discussed how the developable land along I-25 would be raised out of the floodplain if the Plan was not implemented. 7 b. a more environmentally sensitive alternative that did not solely rely on the "divert and drain" concept of stormwater management. 5 . The biggest problem with the presentation is that it completely omitted what seems to be the overriding reason for considering this Plan — that of pulling thousands of acres of developable land along I-25 out of the 100-year floodplain. In the presentation to the FC Water Board, this was not even suggested as among the "benefits" of the Plan. In my opinion, that omission was grievous . When I questioned staff on this issue, it became quickly apparent that, yes, this was a significant reason why the Plan was being considered. Even further, staff finally stated that "aiding economic development" was one of the main priorities of the City ' s stormwater management efforts . I certainly agree that the City has a policy role in aiding economic development through stormwater management, but then why paint the entire presentation in terms of attempting to minimize property damage to already existing homes, roads, and farms? And why hold up a "loss of life" threat to substantiate those expenditures? — that is a very cynical and egregious approach to aiding economic development along I-25 . To address this problem, I ' d suggest the presentation to the Council Worksession include a few slides which: a. Describe the role of the City' s whole stormwater program as an aid/abettor of the City' s economic development programs. b. Discuss how the Box Elder Creek Stormwater plan proposal (as developed within the various neighboring community stakeholders) included discussions about the need to move forward with the project as a means of facilitating development along I-25 (rather than solely as a means of minimizing property damage to existing homes, roads, and farms). c . Include a chart of the number of acres of developable land along I-25 that will be raised out of the 100-year floodplain should the Plan be implemented. d. Include a map/chart of the likely development pattern of that developable land that is raised out of the 100-year floodplain should the Plan be implemented. e . Include a longer discussion about who would pay for this aid/abetment of potential future I-25 development — would it be paid for by existing City ratepayers? Or by the proposed new development? Thank you for your consideration, 8 MEMORANDUM ATTACHMENT 4 FROM THE CITY OF FORT COLLINS NATURAL RESOURCES ADVISORY BOARD DATE : May 28, 2007 TO : Mayor and City Council Members FROM: Ryan M . Staychock on behalf of the Natural Resources Advisory Board SUBJECT: Recommendation pertaining to the Boxelder Creek Regional Stormwater Master Plan., October 2006. The NRAB recommends that City Council support a "Boxelder Creek Regional Stormwater Master Plan" that maintains or enhances the Boxelder watershed as a Water Corridors , natural habitat and ecosystem2, and important floodplain3 by restoring the native vegetation and channel topography to a naturally meandering plains stream corridor that is protected by a natural feature buffer zone adequate for preserving the drainage as a natural feature . The NRAB further recommends that : 1 . Any storm drainage or detention pond constructed in the Boxelder watershed be designed to create permanent natural Habitat areas incorporating native vegetation; 2. A primary off street "greenway" be located along Boxelder creek establishing an important connection between neighborhoods, employment areas, an activity center, and other areas; 3 . A funding strategy to implement the plan is exclusively based on properties which benefit specially (as defined by the Boxelder Creek Stormwater Master Plan, October 2006). by imposing only a one-time fee, or system development fee, that is imposed when any said property is developed or annexed. Please feel free to contact me regarding the NRAB 's recommendation on this issue. Respectfully Submitted, Ryan M. Staychock, Chair Natural Resources Advisory Board 970-481 - 1801 ryanstaychock@hotmail.com cc: Darin Atteberry, City Manager John Stokes, Staff Liaison City Plan. Fort Collins, CO. May 4, 2004 . Community Planning and Environmental Services. Principles and Policies: Corridors; Water Corridors. 225=226 Z City Plan. Fort Collins, CO. May 4, 2004. Community Planning and Environmental Services. Principles and Policies: Environment; Principle ENV-6 122 ' City Plan. Fort Collins, CO. May 4, 2004 . Community Planning and Environmental Services. Principles and .Policies: .Environment, Policy ENV-6. 2 Floodplains. 122 4 City Plan. Fort Collins, CO. May 4, 2004 . Community Planning and Environmental Services. Principles and Policies: Water Corridors; Policy WC 2. 7. 226 MINUTES CITY OF FORT COLLINS NATURAL RESOURCES ADVISORY BOARD Regular Meeting 200 W. Mountain, Suite A April 18, 2007 For Referenee. Ryan Staychock, NRAB Chair - 4814 801 Ben Manvel, Council Liaison - 217-1932 John Stokes, Staff Liaison - 221 -6263 Board Members Present Glen Colton, Linda Knowlton, Rob Petterson, Joseph Piesman, Liz Pruessner, Ryan Staychock Board Members Absent Alan Apt, Amy Dean, Clint Skutchan Staff Present Natural Resources Dent: John Stokes, Judi Vas Storm Water — Susan Hayes, Bob Smith The meeting was called to order at &03 p.m. Guests No guests were present, Agenda Review There were no additions or corrections to the Agenda Public Comments There were no public comments, Review and Approval of Minutes Piesman moved that the minutes for March 21 , 2007 be approved. Knowlton seconded the motion. The motion was unanimously approved. Boxelder Basin _ Bob Smith Smith said since he had last presented these items to the Board, the Boxelder Master Plan had been updated and there were no changes to Cooper Slough. He would like to get either a recommendation from the Board or comments he can pass on to Council. He said he would highlighted any major changes to the plan. He explained that the Boxelder Basin is about 260 square miles which impacts a lot of different jurisdictions. The City realized the area is bigger than just Fort Collins. An alliance was formed with representatives from the other entities. The key decisions are: Adoption of Master Plan and how do they pay for the plan and allocate the cost between all the entities ? Natural Resources Advisory Board April 18, 2007 Page 2 of 5 Smith said any development that takes place in the floodplain has certain criteria that needs to be met. Structurally there is no more risk due to the growth in the area but there is more infrastructure and more uses. Smith reviewed the summary of potential consequences. The present worth damages is higher than before. Smith continued stating that the alliance faced the question of how to mitigate existing problems, how to guide redevelopment, and how to determine which are local. They came up with phase one which on a regional basis are the improvements that impact the flaw of the lower parts of Boxelder Creek. The question is "how do they finance phase one"7 The road improvements, etc of other phases become more of a local jurisdiction or developer issue. ■ Knowlton commented that event though the City of Fort Collins did not recommend Alternative 3 the technical advisory committee did. She asked how that came about? + Smith said Fort Collins said they wouldn't improve it in the master plan when they realized the area was much greater than just Fort Collins. They wanted to figure out what was best for a regional basis. The City made the previous information available for the alliance to use. Alternatives 1 , 2, and 3 were the original and 4, 5 , and b came along after the regional scope was determined. Several other entities had done work on the project which was all pulled together by a consultant hired by the alliance to come up with a recommendation. Staychock asked what the main environmental issues would be. • Smith explained that the I-25 corridor plan was developed by the City and the County a number of years ago. As part of that plan they wanted to protect the Boxelder Corridor. The area the corridor plan identified was pulled out of the floodpWn. There is a flow split right at Prospect. They had to go into a lot of detail to figure out the improvements to maintain this overflow area.. +� Knowlton commented that she was disappointed that there was no mention of keeping Boxelder natural flowing. She said that was a huge issue when the City flan was updated in 2002. She would like to see the City is acknowledging that. • Smith explained that Boxelder Creek is really being maintained as it is. The detention ponds mentioned are all off stream from Boxelder. + Staychock asked if the water in the detention ponds is going to be used and transported via Boxelder for irrigation purposes. • Smith said they are strictly dry except for a 100 year event. Clark Reservoir is used as storage for irrigation. In the event of a flood water could only be stared if they had water rights and an easement which is not part of the project. • Hayes commented that the erosion buffer was not mentioned. When the original master plan was done, active areas of erosion were identified. As development comes into the City, they can restrict what can go in those areas so they don 't put structures at risk. They can make a recommendation that the County do the same but that is really up to the County. ■ Piesrnan asked if there would need to be an increase in the stormwater fee for the City of Fort Collins if they wanted to do everything on the plan. + Smith said that the fees are currently maxed out. The City feels everyone will benefit from the plan so everyone needs to share the cost. Some discussion followed regarding details of financing the project. Smith said they haven't gotten to that yet. } Natural Resources Advisory Board April 18, 2007 Page 3 of 5 Following further discussion, Staychock asked Stokes if he sees any critical habitat areas that are being removed from the floodplain. + Stokes said he is not aware of any. Most of that land is farmland right now. He said the City owns the land and have conservation easements on some. The idea was to try and preserve a modest corridor. Timnath has been anxious to get that corridor out of the fl.00dplain regardless of what the City does. They have proposed a separate project to build a channel that intercepts the flow just west of Natural Resource's parcel to divert to the river. Discussion followed about financing the project. A lot of the benefits are outside the UGA so it would make sense that specific property owners pay a larger share than general property owners. A question was asked about the proposed Storm Drainage Authority. Smith explained that a Storm Drainage Authority would be formed by an IGA that would direct payment amounts. That authority would actually build and maintain it. He replied that elected officials would vote on this. He commented again that they have barely scratched the surface on the financing issue and they are not scheduled for Council anytime soon. He asked what the Board thinks about the master plan itself. • Pruessner said she liked that they are including trails, etc. ■ Staychock pointed out an item in the plan that seemed confusing: page 17, Table #0, Scenario 2: "Fees assessed based on all parcels in the Boxelder Basin". The body of the document reads "fees being assessed on parcels actually removed from the flood plain". He felt that didn't match the verbiage mi the table. ■ Smith suggested that the Board make a motion and he would take it to Council . The Board listed their concerns: Natural Resources processes, keeping Boxelder Creek in its natural condition, trails, and include buffer standards . • Smith said he would use the words "maintain and/or enhance Boxelder watershed. + Colton commented that they can 't be too specific without knowing what' s in City plan: They had talked about a buffer between communities. He stated that he does share concerns on financing plans but sounds like that is coming later. • Piesman suggested that the Board take some time to settle on the language and vote at the next meeting_ • Stokes read three policies from City Plan that addressed the Board' s concerns. * Knowlton said she would like to include what Stokes had read. But maybe they should not reference City plan as Timnath might be opposed. + Smith agreed with Knowlton's suggestion that City Plan not be referenced. He said if the Board prepares their motion next month, he could take it to the other jurisdictions. + Staychock said he will draft the Board' s recommendation. Upper Cooper Slough Smith said the master plan was adopted in 2004 which adopted improvements for .Lower Cooper Slough from Vine Drive south. He said the area is predominately undeveloped. The ditch company has asked for a master plan to plan for future urbanization. Smith continued stating MINUTES CITY OF FORT COLLINS NATURAL RESOURCES ADVISORY BOARD Regular Meeting 200 W. Mountain, Suite A May 16, 2007 For Reference: Ryan Staychock, NRAB Chair _ 481 - 1801 Bean Manvel, Council Liaison - 217- 1932 John Stokes, Staff Liaison - 221 -6263 Board Members Present Alan Apt, Glen Colton, Amy Dean, Rob Patterson, Joseph Piesman, Liz Pruessner, Clint Skutchan, Ryan Staychock Board Members Absent Linda Knowlton Staff Present Natural Resources D t: John Stokes, Judi Vos Storm Water -- Bob Smith Guests None present. The meeting was called to order at 6:04 p.m . Review and Approval of Minutes: Liz moved to approve the minutes for April 18, 2007. Colton seconded the motion which passed unanimously. Boxelder/Cooper Slough Master Plan — Recommendations • Staychock asked if there were comments on the draft memorandum he had prepared for the Board ' s consideration. • Colton commented that it looped good. He would Iike to see it reference the sections in the City Plan. • Pruessncr reminded the Board of Knowlton' s suggestion in April that the memo should not reference City Plan. • Smith agreed that it may not be necessary. • Colton said he wants to make sure Council recognizes the items cited are in the City Plan. He feels it is important to have substance on how the Board came up with the information. • Apt agreed. + Ryan said to further address Kanowlton's concerns; the Board needs to make two recommendations. The first would be that Council adopt the Boxelder plan and a similar motion related to Cooper Slough. i I Natural Resources Advisory Board May 16, 2007 Page 2 of 6 Colton moved to adopt the draft and reference the sections that relate to Boxeldcr specifically. Staychock agreed to reference the sections cited from the City Plan. Alan seconded the motion which was unanimous. Apt moved that the Natural. Resources Advisory Board recommend to Council to support the Upper Cooper Slough executive summary that follows in accordance with the City of Fort Collin' s City Plan. Dean seconded the motion which was unanimously approved. Natural Resources General Fund Budget — John Stokes Stokes explained that the Department is gust beginning to draft offers for the budgeting for outcomes (BF4) process. trace the offers are completed they will be presented to the Environmental Health results team. He stated there are currently 6. 05 FTE' s working on air quality, solid waste reduction, and greenhouse gas emissions with 5 .05 FTEs funded in general fund and 1 FTE funded by the Utility program (Kathy Collier, Climate Wise program). The department proposes to continue with all the current programs and is asking for additional staff. The Natural Resources department general fund took a big hit (about 30%) several years ago. Going forward the department would like to fund current staff and bring in an additional 1 .5 positions in staff- ■ .75 — Climatewise, %2 Tech, 1/, PR/Marketing + . 5 — Sustainability Action Group - Need that person to help achieve sustainability goals and help the program to be successful • .25 - Solid Waste _ bring Gordon back up to full-tune — They are not currently staffed at a level to keep progress with goals. Stokes said if staffing stays the same, the Climate Wise program would have to stop accepting new members. He explained that the additions first have to go through the Service Area director. if approved, the offers are presented to the results team who gets an allocation from the Budget Lead team . The department will revise and resubmit the offers based on comments/suggestions from the results team. if the offers make it over the line, they go to the Budget Dead team and then to Council. • Petterson asked when it would be appropriate for the Board to offer their input, • Stokes replied that would be before the second round which would be June/July. + Petterson said he would be inclined to do it earlier. • Stokes said it would be appropriate for the Board to send a memo to council with recommendations and copy the chairman of the results team. Discussion followed about the types of recommendations that would be appropriate to come from the Board and the offers related to program dollars. Land Conservation & Stewardship Board ATTACHMENT 5 ,2008 Page 1 of 6 DRAFT EXCERPT MINUTES CITY OF FORT COLLINS LAND CONSERVATION & STEWARDSHIP BOARD Regular Meeting 215 North Mason, Confereuce Room 1A May 14, 2008 DATE : Wednesday, May 14, 2008 LOCATION : 215 North Mason , Conference Room 1 A TIME : 6 : 00 p. m. For Reference: - 493 -7225 Mayor Doug Hutchinson - 416-2154 John Stokes, Staff Liaison - 221 -6263 Board Members Present Raymond Boyd , Linsey DeB ell , Chris Gaughan, Trudy Haines, Vicky McLane, Linda Stanley, Dave Theoboid, Karyl Ting Board Members Excused Michelle Grooms Council Liaison Mayor, Doug Hutchinson (not present) Staff Present Natural Resources 1 Natural Areas Department. Mark Sears, John Stokes , Erica Saunders Guests Bob Smith (City of Fort Collins Water Planning and Development Manager) Bonnie Adamson (Larimer County League of Women Voters) Call to order Stanley called the meeting to order at 6 : 07 p.m . Public Comments None Agenda Review Linda Stanley said that Clark Mapes ' presentation was cancelled. Review and Approval of Minutes Motion by McLane, seconded by Boyd, to approve the minutes as presented. Approved unanimously. New Business . Boxelder Creek. Regional Stormwater Master flan Bob Smith Stokes said that this project is for a water feature in the northeast part of town and in the County. It was reviewed previously by the Natural Resources Advisory Board (NRAB). At one point they had decided not to bring this plan to the Land Conservation and Stewardship Board (LCSB) because formerly the LCSB 's charter would not allow the Board to review projects if there was no direct nexus to Natural Areas. Council asked for the Board ' s charter to be revised (which would include review of this project) and at the Board 's last meeting, they recommended those changes. The ordinance authorizing the change will go to Council on 2"d reading next Tuesday. The ordinance makes clear that the LCSB will not be in the business of development review because the City already has a Planning and Zoning Board to do that. The LCSB is not yet authorized to advise Council , and once the changes pass the 2°d reading, it won' t become effective for 10 days. Stokes said although the Board could not give direct feedback to Council, they could give feedback to Bob Smith. Bob Smith (City of Fort Collins Water Planning and Development Manager) gave a presentation on the Boxelder Creek Regional Stormwater Master Plan . The presentation included : R Background ■ Floodplain Haines asked why the City took the lead on this project. Smith said that the County actually took the lead, and the City was just a participant. ■ Floodplain — North ■ Coal Creek Floodplain Above CR 68 ■ Coal Creek Floodplain into Wellington ■ FloodpIain- north to Mtn Vista ■ Boxelder Ck above RC 58 ■ I-25 Overflow breakout below ■ Floodplain - Mtn Vista to Prospect ■ Boxelder Creek below CR 52 a Boxelder Creek above CR 52 ■ Overflow along I-25 above Mtn Vista ■ Floodplain - Prospect south Smith pointed out the parcels that the Natural Areas Program may have an interest in (Pearson, Vangbo property, Running Decr Natural Area). Stanley asked about the Cooper Slough, and Sears said that we have worked hard over the last few years to acquire properties in this area but didn't find any willing sellers. Stanley asked what landowners could do with properties in the floodplain, and Smith said that our regulations do not allow improvements in the floodplain. Haines asked if County regulations would allow development in the floodplain, and Smith said the County has the same floodplain regulations as the City does. 2 Haines asked if the Natural Areas Program was interested in buying properties if it is already in the floodplain and protected. Sears said we are interested but have not been able to convince anybody to sell because the market value of the properties is not very high. Stanley asked if this project would have an effect on Cooper Slough . Smith said no. ■ Boxelder Creek above Vine Drivc ■ Overflow along 1=25 above Mulberry ■ Summary of potential consequences ■ Boxelder Creek regional alliance • Boxelder Creek regional master plan ■ Alternatives evaluated • Recommended alternative — regional storage and conveyance ■ Recommended alternative (phase 2) ■ Master plan improvements Stanley said that she does not think taking property out of the floodplain is an improvement, and basically the public is subsidizing a private individual ' s investment. Gaughan asked if you need to provide more floodplain area in a different location if you remove land from the floodplain. Smith said no, it is different than if you remove a wetland. ■ improvements — north Haines asked how many people live in the affected area. Smith said he couldn' t give an exact answer - there are about 670 structures, but some are residential and some are commercial . * Improvements — south of Wellington ■ Improvements _ south Stanley asked if Timnath would be involved in this project, and Smith said no. He said Timnath wants to expand their Growth Management Area (GMA) to Richard ' s Lake and the County has told them that if they annex land that is a tributary to Boxelder, they will need to pay for improvements. However, land farther south is not part of this GMA agreement and Timnath will receive improvements they are not going to pay for. Smith said that Timnath has indicated they will intercept flows and divert water to the river in a different location from where it has historically flowed. Stanley said that the Natural Areas Program is interested in acquiring several of the affected properties and now they would become more expensive by taking them out of the floodplain. Sears asked if owners of private lands that will benefit from these improvements would be participants in the project. Smith said yes. An IGA would be developed to pay the costs but the costs have not been identified yet. For the City of Fort Collins these properties would currently pay a plant (facility) investment fee at the time of building permit. That is $4,420 per acre; if the alliance charges a fee of $ 1 ,000 per acre, the rest of the fee would go into the City' s pot of money. Stanley said that we are slitting our throats with this project because we are taking land out of the floodplain to make it more developable, and that is land we are interested in acquiring (area in the Timnath community separator). She asked why we would want to take that property out of the floodplain. Smith said that in order to reducing damages to properties farther north, we need to reduce the flow at the split, which removes these properties from the floodplain . He said we can 't eliminate the threat farther north without eliminating the flow through this area. McLane said that a lot of damages and economic expense would be avoided with this project. Stanley asked what benefits are included in the cost analysis. She said that by taking land out of the floodplain, the value of land goes up, but this should not be included in the benefit analysis because it only benefits the landowner. Smith said that typically this benefit value is not included in the cost analysis, but since this was done by committee, the committee wanted to include it. Theobald said that he had three main comments. 1 ) The language in the document is weird. It talks about removing structures from the floodplain when these structures are not actually being moved; the floodplain is being changed. From a natural areas perspective, what makes these properties good is the natural ecological process of flooding. With this project we are using more engineering to straighten, dam up, and modify natural processes. We are removing all possible natural values. 2) Basically the crux of this project is that there are two reservoirs that will be modified/ improved to increase storage area. In 100 years what is going to happen? Will we be in same spot? 3 ) The projections on a 100 year flood were based on presuming some sort of climate in the future using historical climate. Is this not an issue, or more important of an issue, with climate change? Smith said that they have done some research in the climate change area, and the experts are talking about fewer storms, but more severe storms, but it is not certain what that means. Gaughan said that this relates Theobald 's first and third comments - if culverts can' t handle the storm that we' re not predicting they will still get broken. Smith said that they use the 100 year flood as a standard. Theobald said that he is worried about shrinking the floodplain and allowing more development to occur. The dams are likely to fill up from siltation over time, and effective reservoir capacity will be declining over time. Smith said that once we build a facility we have an obligation to maintain it. Theobald asked why we couldn' t just buy the structures rather than move the floodplain. Ile asked if that was considered as an option. Smith said that brings in the issue of fixed income and relocation. He said that also does not address the infrastructure, and people driving through these areas arc at risk. Theobald asked if there has been any talk about requirements for future development to minimize the amount of impervious surface. He said that was one of the "gotchas" of the Spring Creek flood -- even though stormwater features were in place, the watershed was developed and created a flashy system. Smith said that impervious surface has not been discussed, but due to the undeveloped nature of the watershed we are ahead of the game. One of the factors is guidance for new development. Theobald said that it might be interesting to make recommendations about land use and trying to reduce the amount of impervious surface. Smith said that they are looking at best management practices that reduce the impact of development on water quality . • Potential funding sources ■ Process ■ Inter-governmental agreement Smith said that they will be asking Council if they want us to continue working on this or not. They had direction to put a regional plan together in 2004 and this is where we' re at. ■ Q&A 4 Haines said that she is still unclear about the structures that will be removed from the floodplain in Phases If and III. Smith said that Phases II and III just relate to infrastructure like road crossings. Phase 1 deals with structures; II and III deal with emergency response and commuting/ transportation. Haines said that she has four worries: 1 ) $36 million is a lot of money; 2) This project will increase the cost of land that we' re potentially interested in for community separators. By doing this we are shooting ourselves in the foot; 3 ) She is uncomfortable using taxpayer money to make land more valuable so someone else can develop it. She said that this is not our role; 4) If Timnath is a beneficiary of this project, she is concerned that they are not participating. Stokes said that he was under the impression at the NRAB discussion that landowners that would benefit directly from the project would be paying for it. Smith said that the City' s share of the payment would come from fees collected from Boxelder Creek . Stokes said that there will be a direct relationship between the land that benefits and the stormwater fees. Smith said that plans project out 3040 years, and it will be about 10 years before things are built. DeBell asked what percentage of the project would be funded by stormwater fees. Smith said that not a lot of City property is in this area, maybe less than 20%, so we are not a big player in this. Sears asked if we contribute based on the GMA or the City limits. Smith said it is based on City limits, but it would still need to be worked out how changes would take place as annexations occur. McLane said that construction costs have doubled in the last year and removing 33 roadways from flooding is a huge savings. She said there are some negatives but we are forgetting the infrastructure benefits. Smith said that it will help existing roads and future roads. Part of the $36 million will be spent on building bridges at locations so water will no longer overtop the road. Stanley asked how the area would be affected if there is not a flood. Smith went back through the slides at the beginning of the presentation and said there is flow in the drainage but it hasn' t been treated very well ; it has been abused . 'There are agriculture fields right to the edge, riprap, and steep banks. If these areas developed we would be able to kick in buffer standards and development standards. Haines asked if a wildlife and environmental impact study had been done on the effects of the improvements. Smith said that has not been done yet. Gaughan asked about Cooper Sough and eliminating the surface flow as recharge for the area. Smith said the surface flow only occurs every 100 years. Gaughan asked if most of the local hydrology is unrelated to Cooper Slough. Smith confirmed that was correct. He said they are concerned about additional urbanization in the Mountain Vista area, and making sure the flows are clean, but that is separate from Boxelder. Stanley said we are taking property out of the floodplain that we want as a separator and Timnath is dying to get their hands on it for development. She said on a field trip to the area she was struck by how much open area there is, and how it has a rural feel . Now we are almost guaranteeing this area will be developed . It will be developed by Timnath, so they get all the goodies and we pay for it. She said it bothers her that we continue to engineer ourselves out of the mess that we have created ; we have already built roads so now we have to protect those values. Theobald said that the roads are there to serve us, not us to serve them . Smith said that if this project doesn't go forward, we are still going to see development out there. 5 Ting asked about the City of Fort Collins' existing policies. Smith said that the City has already adopted a master plan on the west side of 1 -25, and we know what the structures in that area need to be. Ting asked what the City ' s strategy is if the alliance falls down. Smith said that we already have floodplain regulations. 'Ping said that there is always the issue of mitigating floodplain development and we already have a mechanism in place for this. Smith said that there is no master plan east of 1-25 . He said it is not the end of the world if this doesn' t get approved; we would go our own separate ways rather than doing a regional project. DeBell asked if existing City infrastructure would be impacted . Smith said that there is one structure with capacity for flows (on Mulberry), and all other structures would be impacted. The City has criteria saying arterial streets can't have water overtopping streets because these are set aside for emergency response. Arterials in Fort Collins are on the mile. Prospect would be impacted — there are two locations on Prospect west of 1-25 where water overtops the road. Ting asked if the City ' s cost for those improvements would basically be equal to our share of the regional improvement project. Smith said yes. Stokes said that the NRAB did make a recommendation to Council on this project. They recommended to support the project but wanted to make sure money would be invested back into restoration, and didn't want to subsidize the benefits gained by others. 6 Boxelder Creek IGA and Regional Stormwater Master Plan Vtoo- Y i Boxelder IGA and Regional Stormwater Master Plan • Question for Council — Should staff continue to work on an IGA for stormwater cooperation and the Boxelder Creek Regional Stormwater Master Plan ? OMING Boxelder " R " Basin 1s T Y s Background • 2002 — Floodplain update and stability analysis • 2004 — City and County adoption of Stormwater Master Plan ( Pursue regional plan for Boxelder Creek) • 2005 — Alliance initiated regional master plan • 2006 — Completion of draft regional master plan • 2007 — Adoption by Wellington and County and initiated discussions on IGA • 2008 — Submittal of grant application for Clark Detention Past Council Direction City Plan — BoxelderCreek Preserve • protect natural areas in floodplain Balance environmental protection and economic development In " breakout areas" development comply with floodplain regulations Restore vegetation and naturally meandering stream . • lish 1 00-foot buffer zone City nr Port coWm 5 ��uaon uw.lo�rwn Yf� J Ynr..nrn ii4.. r.W W�roMr � � • a All • Q-to olol to z a S Y .mcw.to t ^LLLi g Cibof Port CoWne 6 3 a� I �� ^ � cmilY[totos I' i � r Clly of Fort Cowes 7 Boxelder • • i 'fit � ' «� �C'�� J+� -�C7�'; 3: " .+,. ♦ �f City O( Fvrt Co01ne 8 4 Overflow Breakout • CilYof Fat CoWm 9 Boxelder • IL City or Fun comma. 10 5 Boxelder Creek Above CR 52 Central Floodplain Y Overflow Along I -25 Below Mtn Vista Boxelder Creek Above Vine Drive Overflow Along 1 =25 Below Vine Drive Vtoo- Y i South Floodplain Y y • .t Summary of Potential Consequences . . MF. Land in Present Irimpacted Roads Floodplain OvertoppedWorth during 100- Damages year Event . , County/City million Fort Collins Town of $29. 5 220 Wellington Town of 11k4 million 50 Timnath TOTAjKi0i9.Jk 670 41000MI Y i 17 Boxelder Creek Regional Alliance • Alliance Members — Town of Wellington — Larimer County — City of Fort Collins — Town of Timnath — Town of Windsor — North Poudre and New Cache la Poudre Irrigation Co . — Boxelder Sanitation District — Colorado Water Conservation Board — Private Property Owner's Group — Colorado Department of Transportation • Technical Advisory Committee • Financial Advisory Committee Boxelder Creek Regional Master Plan • Provides : — Cost effective projects to reduce flood damage to existing structures — Guidance for new development — Guidance for existing infrastructure improvements — Removal of floodplain on undeveloped land Y Y I Master Plan Regional Improvements 20 • Clark Reservoir Detention $6 . 2 million • Edson Detention Pond $6 . 1 million • Middle Boxelder Creek Improvements $ 1 . 1 million • L&W Canal Crossing $ 1 . 3 million Total Improvements : $ 14 . 7 million 10 Master Plan Regional Improvements C� Y L) 60, WIM LS. e.e ,., • 21 Improvement Results ( Removed from floodplain ) Total Land Undeveloped Land 17410 ac. Structures 1 . Road Overtopping Benefit to Cost Ratio 1 . 8 to (Benefit = damage - • • ,Cos, --= cost off improvements) Cityof Poet CoWne 22 1 1 m. i 1 cram �cmrw 23 L4 i � cawrc♦o.n v f Cls♦r Bon c♦m♦. 24 12 1 r ? Q is a " Cltvo(Port CoWm I !P _ City of Pon CoWne 13 -Imp" � �J i 1 1 � � i 1 _ r 27 r �� . [YMi WIYq aw or Pon c.mn. 28 14 Master Plan Outreach • Newsletters • Monthly Meetings • Press Releases • Flyers • Newspaper Articles • Open House • Organizational Meetings • Individual Meetings • Web page Y Master Plan Process • Adopted by County and Wellington • Fort Collins ( In conjunction with IGA) NRAB Recommendation P&Z Board Work Session Water Board Land Conservation & Stewardship Board City Council Work Session ( May 27tn ) City Council (July 1 , tentative ) Pre -disaster Mitigation Grant • Clark Reservoir detention storage deemed a viable project • Window of opportunity is diminishing • County made application for $3 million grant for a $4 million project • Shared local match of $ 1 million • Just received notice of project selection Y Inter=Governmental Agreement • Key Provisions - SW Authority — 5- member board — Not another layer of government — Receptacle for monies , grants , etc . — Vehicle for construction and long term maintenance — Focus on regional improvements Inter-Governme (con ' t) • Key Provisions - Stormwater Fees — Uniform monthly and PIF fees in basin — Rate study underway — Based on developed property — Each entity pays their fair share — Fort Collins from existing Stormwater fees — Wellington and County from proposed fees Y i Overall Time Line • May 27 , 2008 — City Council WS • May 2008 — PDM grant notification • July 2008 — IGA for Authority and PDM grant matching funds • Summer 2008 — Rate study completion • Winter 2008 — Wellington and Larimer County adoption of rates and update to IGA Discussion A