Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutCOUNCIL - AGENDA ITEM - 04/05/2016 - ITEMS RELATING TO DUST PREVENTION AND CONTROLAgenda Item 20 Item # 20 Page 1 AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY April 5, 2016 City Council STAFF Lindsay Ex, Environmental Program Manager Lucinda Smith, Environmental Sustainability Director Jackie Kozak-Thiel, Chief Sustainabillity Officer SUBJECT Items Relating to Dust Prevention and Control. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY A. First Reading of Ordinance No. 044, 2016, Amending Chapter 12 of the Code of the City of Fort Collins Related to Particulate Matter Emissions. B. First Reading of Ordinance No. 045, 2016, Amending the Fort Collins Land Use Code by the Addition of Provisions Pertaining to Dust Prevention and Control. The purpose of this item is to implement regulations and a set of consistent best practices (Dust Control Manual) for twelve specific activities that generate dust in order to reduce health impacts and nuisances associated with dust generating activities. Per Council direction during the February 9 Work Session, staff has developed an exception for small residential projects (less than 10,000 square feet), whereby these projects do not have to employ the Dust Control Manual to prevent, control, and minimize dust generation unless two written warnings have been issued within a one year period. In addition to the regulations and set of best practices outlined in the Dust Control Manual, staff has developed and is implementing a tracking system for fugitive dust complaints. In addition, per Council direction, the City has enacted an Administrative Policy applying the Dust Control Manual to all City projects, so that the City is leading by example. STAFF RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends adoption of the Ordinances on First Reading. BACKGROUND / DISCUSSION “Fugitive dust” consists primarily of soil particles in the air caused by wind and human activities such as excavating, demolition, abrasive blasting, and other activities. Dust causes health impacts; safety, visibility, and aesthetic issues; and is a nuisance that can cause expensive damage to property and machinery. While there are existing state and county regulations that address dust, these regulations are not sufficient at controlling dust emissions in many cases because:  Some sources of dust emissions, e.g., street sweeping, saw cutting, development projects less than 5 acres in size, etc. that affect Fort Collins citizens are not covered by state or county regulations.  State and county compliance and enforcement resources are limited.  City code compliance officers cannot enforce state and county dust control requirements. Agenda Item 20 Item # 20 Page 2 On February 9, 2016, City Council reviewed the potential approaches to preventing, minimizing, and controlling dust within Fort Collins. Council directed staff to address dust control in four main ways: 1. First, lead by example as a municipal organization in adopting the Manual (attached as Exhibit A to Ordinance No. 044, 2016) into the City’s Administrative Policy. 2. Second, to collect additional data on the implications (from a cost perspective) to applying the proposed dust prevention and control regulations on residential properties. Council noted the significant community discussion around housing affordability as a key concern. 3. Third, Council asked staff to begin tracking dust complaints immediately, so that they can better assess the extent of the problem and tailor potential solutions in the future. 4. Finally, Council directed staff to develop a hybrid approach to regulating fugitive dust by requiring all sites to prevent, minimize and control dust; but to only apply the Manual on sites over a certain size. Council directed staff to ascertain what the right threshold (size) is to apply the Manual based on a data-driven approach and through additional stakeholder outreach. As discussed with Council, once adopted, staff is proposing that enforcement of these regulations be delayed until November 1, 2016 in order to allow for training and outreach to occur prior to enforcement. 1. Lead by Example While City operations and capital projects have consistently addressed dust on individual project sites, based on feedback from City Council, the City Manager adopted the Manual into the City’s Administrative Policy on March 22, 2016. Staff met with fifteen City Departments and developed the following approach to leading by example:  City operations - will use the Manual to implement dust prevention and control immediately upon adoption into City Administrative Policy  City Contracts - o New bids and Requests for Proposals (RFPs) - The Manual will be incorporated into the specifications or supplemental terms on all new bids as of March 2016. o In-process bids and RFPs - An addendum will be initiated if timing allows, or it will be incorporated in conjunction with contract negotiations. o Existing contracts - City staff will begin working on a process to amend existing contracts, either at the time of renewal or via change order or amendment, to ensure that all existing contracts are in compliance with the Manual by November 1, 2016 (proposed date for when the private sector shall comply with the proposed regulations). 2. Collect additional data on the cost implications of implementing the regulations, especially from a housing affordability perspective As discussed during the February 9 Work Session, staff worked with consulting firm, AECOM, and members of the Fugitive Dust Working Group to determine the impact, from a cost perspective, of implementing the proposed regulations around dust prevention and control. Since the work session, the cost data have been broken out according to the required versus additional best management practices and an additional data point has been developed for the costs for single family homes, see the table below. Agenda Item 20 Item # 20 Page 3 Project Dust Mitigation Cost Total Project Cost Dust Cost as % of Overall Cost Notes Required BMPs Additional BMPs Total Costs 1. Infill Single Family Home – estimate 1* $700 $0 $700 $353,620 0.2% (0.2% required) Estimated costs, minimal dust control 2. Infill Single Family Home – estimate 2* $6,090 $6,080 $7,355 $360,275 3.4% (1.7% required) Estimated costs, maximum dust control 3. Greenfield Single Family Home – estimate 1 $700 $0 $700 $587,530 0.1% (0.1% required) Estimated costs, minimal dust control 4. Greenfield Single Family Home – estimate 2 $6,090 $8,580 $14,670 $600,000 2.4% (1.0% required) Estimated costs, maximum dust control 5. Horsetooth and Timberline Intersection $32,420 $3,320 $35,740 $3,304,501 1.1% (1.0% Agenda Item 20 Item # 20 Page 4  Requiring all projects to cover loads and use the required saw cutting and grinding best management practices (BMPs): Staff recommends requiring all projects to adhere to these standards because these dust generating activities can have significant impacts on neighbors and have minimal costs to control via the dust mitigation techniques outlined in the Manual. o For example, not covering loads is one of the most frequent complaints staff receives related to fugitive dust, and both of the required BMPs result in negligible to no additional costs to the operator. o Saw cutting and grinding was one of the activities that, when BMPs were applied, dust generated was reduced between 95-99% in the controlled observations. In addition, utilizing water when cutting or grinding is a technique that extends the life of the saw and is recognized as a best practice in the industry.  Exempting residential projects under 10,000 square feet from applying the BMPs outlined in the Manual upfront: o During the Council work session, Councilmembers reiterated the communitywide concerns related to housing affordability. Staff was directed to develop a data-driven approach to finding the right threshold for which the Manual would only apply if problems occurred. o Staff reviewed building permits from 2015 and found that 80% of single family detached permits were for lots under 10,000 square feet. (For reference, one acre equals 43,560 square feet.) In addition, this threshold is comparable to when erosion control planning requirements are applied to sites (though that threshold is based on disturbed area instead of lot size). o Based on these data, staff shared these proposed thresholds with the Fugitive Dust Working Group, the Planning and Zoning Board, the Air Quality Advisory Board, and City staff. All groups felt that exempting residential projects under 10,000 square feet addressed the concerns related to housing affordability and encompassed the majority of residential housing projects that do not tend to generate significant amounts of dust. o The one exception to this threshold is when builders are constructing contiguous lots that exceed the 10,000 square foot threshold. Staff proposes that if a builder is constructing multiple lots that are contiguous to each other, and the total area of these contiguous lots exceeds 10,000 square feet, then the Manual should apply.  Delayed enforcement: As discussed at the Council Work Session, staff is still proposing that enforcement be delayed until November 1, 2016. If adopted by City Council, staff would propose the following timeline for training, outreach, and enforcement: o May-June Develop training and enforcement materials o June-August Conduct training sessions with City staff and the private sector o June-October Conduct outreach on the regulations and the Manual o November Official enforcement begins CITY FINANCIAL IMPACTS Enforcement of the proposed dust control ordinance is expected to be handled by existing City staff in multiple departments. As the activities that generate dust span all types of City inspections, e.g., rights-of-way, developments, building construction, etc., all City inspectors will be trained to assist with enforcement in the field. This includes Code Compliance, Erosion Control, R-of-Way (ROW) staff, and Building Inspectors, at a minimum. This decentralized approach for enforcement is intended to minimize the added workload for each group and leverage the fact staff are already out in the field. Enforcement will add to the workload of these staff and potentially for others involved in the enforcement process such as the City Attorney’s Office, but the need for new resources for enforcement is not anticipated at this time. There is expected to be very limited additional cost to the City organization to comply with the Dust Control Manual. Generally, City departments are already implementing the BMP’s contained in the Dust Control Manual. A few departments have indicated that there would be budgetary impacts if they had to implement an Agenda Item 20 Item # 20 Page 5 additional BMP (only one of which is required if dust is being transported off-site). Funding for dust suppression equipment in these limited cases is being sought through alternative avenues such as the City’s Innovation Fund. In addition, there could be indirect costs associated with the extra staff time spent implementing some of the BMP’s. BOARD / COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION City staff has met with six City boards throughout the development of the dust control and prevention materials:  Air Quality Advisory Board (Attachment 5) – the Air Quality Advisory Board unanimously passed the following motion at its March 21, 2016 meeting: o The Air Quality Advisory Board continues to recommend adoption of the Dust Prevention and Control Manual for all projects within the community. o However, if Council chooses to adopt a hybrid approach as proposed by City staff, then the Board recommends prompt adoption of such approach and encourages staff to initiate soft enforcement as quickly as possible to ensure that contractors and the general public are made aware of these standards during the 2016 construction season.  Building Review Board – staff visited with the Building Review Board on two occasions in 2014 and in 2015 to review the proposal. A third visit with the BRB is scheduled for May 2016.  Land Conservation and Stewardship Board (Attachment 6) – the Land Conservation and Stewardship Board recommended adoption during its February 11, 2015 Board Meeting.  Natural Resources Advisory Board (Attachment 7) – the NRAB reviewed the proposed regulations twice and submitted a memo to city Council in December 2015 expressing their support.  Parks and Recreation Board (Attachment 8) – the Board unanimously supported the proposed regulations and Manual.  Planning and Zoning Board (P&Z) (Attachment 9) – staff met with P&Z during their March 4 Work Session. Planning and Zoning indicated support of the hybrid approach proposed by City staff. As refinements were still being made to the Ordinances, a formal recommendation is scheduled for the April 7 P&Z meeting. Staff will provide the formal recommendation from P&Z prior to Second Reading of the Ordinance on April 19, 2016. PUBLIC OUTREACH Staff has conducted extensive public engagement on this issue since its inception in 2014. Since the work session, staff has conducted the following:  Fugitive Dust Working Group - staff met with the Fugitive Dust Working Group (FDWG) to review the options for addressing Council’s direction to balance dust prevention and control with concerns around housing affordability. All FDWG members were instrumental in developing the proposal outlined and expressed support for the thresholds.  Departmental Outreach - City staff from numerous City departments including Operation Services, Streets, Parks, Natural Areas, Forestry, Stormwater, Engineering, Water Reclamation, Traffic Operations, Transfort, Environmental and Regulatory Affairs, Recreation, and Building Services, had an opportunity to provide feedback on the Dust Control Manual from an operational perspective. Agenda Item 20 Item # 20 Page 6 ATTACHMENTS 1. Council Work Session Summary, February 9, 2016 (PDF) 2. Additional Data Regarding Cost Assumptions (PDF) 3. Public Engagement Summary (PDF) 4. Sustainability Assessment Summary and Tool (PDF) 5. Air Quality Advisory Board minutes, March 21, 2016 (draft) (PDF) 6. Land Conservation and Stewardship Board minutes, February 11, 2015 (PDF) 7. Natural Resources Advisory Board Memo, December 17, 2015 (PDF) 8. Parks and Recreation Board minutes, December 2, 2015 (PDF) 9. Planning and Zoning Board minutes, December 17, 2015 (PDF) 10. City Administrative Policy on Dust Prevention and Control (PDF) 11. Powerpoint presentation (PDF) ATTACHMENT 1 Fugitive Dust – Updated Summary of Cost Estimates This document is a summary of six estimates of the costs associated with dust control, prevention and mitigation at four project types. The data were compiled by AECOM, a private consulting firm in consultation with local contractors or City project managers. The overall costs are summarized below for each analysis, and then more detailed costs on each cost estimate, including assumptions, are provided on the following pages. Summary of Cost Estimates for the Various Project Types Project Dust Mitigation Cost Total Project Cost Dust Cost as % of Overall Cost Notes Required BMPs Additional BMPs Total Costs 1. Infill Single Family Home – estimate 1* $700 $0 $700 $353,620 0.2% (0.2% required) Estimated costs, minimal dust control 2. Infill Single Family Home – estimate 2* $6,090 $6,080 $7,355 $360,275 3.4% (1.7% required) Estimated costs, maximum dust control 3. Greenfield Single Family Home – estimate 1 $700 $0 $700 $587,530 0.1% (0.1% required) Estimated costs, minimal dust control 4. Greenfield Single Family Home – estimate 2 $6,090 $8,580 $14,670 $600,000 2.4% (1.0% required) Estimated costs, maximum dust 1. Infill Single Family Home – Estimate 1- 1500 square feet scrape and rebuild – Minimum Dust Control Activity Dust Activity Task Required BMPs Additional BMPs Notes Demolition Demolition Drop Height no additional cost N/A Minimizing drop heights will add minutes per labor shift to the operator’s time Site Work Earth Moving Drop Height no additional cost N/A see above Grading Reduce Vehicle Speed no additional cost N/A Low speeds are already practiced within construction areas Material Transport Drop Height no additional cost N/A see above Structural Cutting & Grinding Restrict Access no additional cost N/A Construction areas usually restrict access to the site. Additional signs, blockades or temporary fencing may be constructed to further restrict access Site/Street Cleanup Track-out/Carry- out Deposition Removal $700 N/A Manually removing deposition left on the site and in the street will be removed by push broom and water. Depending on the size of the site and frequency of cleanup this is estimated to be 0.2% of total project cost Project Total: $353,620 Mitigation Total: $700 $0 Required BMPs: 0.2% of Project Total Additional BMPs: 0% of Project Total 2. Infill Single Family Home – Estimate 2- 1500 square feet scrape and rebuild – Maximum Dust Control Activity Dust Activity Task Required BMPs Additional BMPs Notes Demolition Demolition High Wind Restriction $2,050 N/A Assume stop work less than 0.5% (0.2 hours) of a 40 hour week for employees and equipment rentals. Assume 8 employees per site at an average rate of $28/hr and rental fees of $800/hr total for all equipment stopping work. Assume total demolition time of 1 week. Wet Suppression N/A $1500-$2000 This involves renting a meter, hose, and pressure nozzle and acquiring a permit to utilize a fire hydrant for water suppression. Site Work Earth Moving High Wind Restriction $1,650 N/A Assume stop work less than 0.5% (0.2 hours) of a 40 hour week for employees and equipment rentals. Assume 6 employees per site at an average rate of $28/hr and rental fees of $650/hr total for all equipment stopping work. Assume total earthmoving/grading time of 1 week. Wet Suppression N/A $1500-$2000 see above Grading High Wind Restriction $1,650 N/A Assume stop work less than 0.5% (0.2 hours) of a 40 hour week for employees and equipment rentals. Assume 6 employees per site at an average rate of $28/hr and rental fees of $650/hr total for all equipment stopping work. Assume total earthmoving/grading time of 1 week. Wet Suppression N/A $1500-$2000 see above Material Transport Load Cover N/A $80 Assume rental from truck service with load covers for extra $10/hr for 8 hours of hauling ($80) Structural Cutting & Grinding Slurry Cleanup/On tool exhaust $40 N/A On tool exhaust systems cost ~$160/ea. Assume 5 tools equipped with exhaust and 5% of total tool cost per project 3. Greenfield Single Family Home – Estimate 1- 3,000 square feet scrape and rebuild – Minimum Dust Control Activity Dust Activity Task Required Additional Notes Demolition Demolition Drop Height no additional cost N/A Minimizing drop heights will add minutes per labor shift to the operator’s time Site Work Earth Moving Drop Height no additional cost N/A see above Grading Reduce Vehicle Speed no additional cost N/A Low speeds are already practiced within construction areas Material Transport Drop Height no additional cost N/A see above Structural Cutting & Grinding Restrict Access no additional cost N/A Construction areas usually restrict access to the site. Additional signs, blockades or temporary fencing may be constructed to further restrict access Site/Street Cleanup Track-out/Carry-out Deposition Removal $700 N/A Manually removing deposition left on the site and in the street will be removed by push broom and water. Depending on the size of the site and frequency of cleanup this is estimated to be 0.2% of total project cost Project Total: $587,530 Mitigation Total: $700 $0 Required BMPs: 0.1% of Project Total Additional BMPs: 0% of Project Total 4. Greenfield Single Family Home – Estimate 1- 3,000 square feet scrape and rebuild – Maximum Dust Control Activity Dust Activity Task Required BMPs Additional BMPs Notes Demolition Demolition Drop Height $2,050 N/A Minimizing drop heights will add minutes per labor shift to the operator’s time Wet Suppression Wet Suppression N/A $1500-$2000 This involves renting a meter, hose, and pressure nozzle and acquiring a permit to utilize a fire hydrant for water suppression. Site Work Earth Moving Drop Height $1,650 N/A Minimizing drop heights will add minutes per labor shift to the operator’s time Wet Suppression N/A $1500-$2000 see above Grading High Wind Restriction $1,650 N/A Assume stop work less than 0.5% (0.2 hours) of a 40 hour week for employees and equipment rentals. Assume 6 employees per site at an average rate of $28/hr and rental fees of $650/hr total for all equipment stopping work. Assume total earthmoving/grading time of 1 week. Wet Suppression N/A $1500-$2000 see above Material Transport Load Cover N/A $80 Assume rental from truck service with load covers for extra $10/hr for 8 hours of hauling ($80) Structural Cutting & Grinding Slurry Cleanup/On tool exhaust $40 N/A On tool exhaust systems cost ~$160/ea. Assume 5 tools equipped with exhaust and 5% of total tool cost per project ($40) Site/Street Cleanup Deposition Removal Deposition Removal $700 N/A Manually removing deposition left on the site and in the street will be removed by push broom and water. Depending on the size of the site and frequency of 5. Horsetooth and Timberline Intersection – Actual Costs Activity Dust Activity Task Required Additional Notes Demolition Stockpiles & Earthmoving Drop Height no additional cost N/A Minimizing drop heights will add minutes per labor shift to the operator’s time. Open Areas Synthetic Cover $23,220 N/A Purchase and application of synthetic or natural cover at $0.63/sy and labor costs. Costs associated with this mitigation measure will vary greatly depending on material costs and size of the area being covered. Site Work Track-out/Carry out Track out Pads $5,800 N/A This cost was pulled directly from the bid sheet for the project Track-out/Carry out Sweeping $3,100 N/A For this project a brush roller system could be operated to remove debris from the road Bulk Material Transport Load Cover N/A $3,320 Assume 4 tandem trucks operating to remove site debris including concrete. Each load cover is priced at $415. Cutting & Grinding On-tool Wet Suppression $300 N/A Tool attachments run between $150-300 per tool used. Project Total: $3,304,501 Mitigation Total: $32,420 $3,320 Required: 1.0% of Project Total Additional: 0.1% of Project Total 6. Project: 222 Laporte City Building – Actual Costs Activity Dust Activity Task Required BMPs Additional BMPs Notes Demolition Demolition Enclosed Mortar Mixer, Building Permit N/A $10,000 Enclosed Mortar Mixer, Building Permit- As costed Stockpile Fencing and High Wind Restrictions (40mph) $5,000 N/A Fencing and High Wind Restrictions (40mph) – Stop work should occur when winds exceed 30mph Site Work Track-out/Carry out Track out Pads $15,000 N/A As costed Track-out/Carry out Wet Suppression $7,500 N/A Most companies will rent or sub this work activity out on an as-needed basis Cutting and Grinding On-tool wet Suppression $7,500 N/A Tool attachments run between $150-300 per tool used. Construction Drywall & Other $5,000 N/A Dust mitigation associated with construction and cutting activities Project Total: $10,000,000 Mitigation Total: $40,000 $10,000 Required: 0.4% of Project Total Additional: 0.1% of Project Total Overall Note: All costs were provided as lump sums from the project manager. PUBLIC ENGAGEMENT SUMMARY PROJECT TITLE: Dust Control and Prevention OVERALL PUBLIC INVOLVEMENT LEVEL: Involve BOTTOM LINE QUESTION: Shall the Council adopt code amendments to control fugitive dust? KEY STAKEHOLDERS: Developer/contractor community, City Departments, residents TIMELINE: 2013-2016 PHASE 1: Internal stakeholder outreach Timeframe: April 2014 – September 2014 Key Messages: Help us define the problem and devise a solution Tools and Techniques: Meetings with affected staff groups  Community Development & Neighborhood Services  Engineering  Streets  Regulatory & Governmental Affairs  Storm Water  Water Engineering & Field Services  City Attorney  Larimer County Department of Health and Environment PHASE 2: External and internal stakeholder engagement Timeframe: June 2014 – February 2015 Key Messages: Staff is working on fugitive dust control. How can we improve our proposal? How will dust control requirements affect you? Tools and Techniques:  Board/Commission meetings - Air Quality Advisory Board, Building Review Board, Planning and Zoning Board, Natural Resources Advisory Board, Parks and Recreation Board, Land Conservation and Stewardship Board  Online Survey – 163 respondents  Open House – February 2015 (14 attendees)  Specific outreach to the business community, including the Chamber of Commerce, business meetings, and a stakeholder meeting with 23 attendees in December 2014 ATTACHMENT 3 PHASE 3: Pilot Project – Field Data Collection and Fugitive Dust Working Group Timeframe: June 2015 – February 2016 Key Messages: Now that draft Ordinances and a Draft Dust Prevention and Control Manual has been drafted, how can these products be improved? What are the cost, time to implement, water use, dust prevention, and other impacts of this proposal? Tools and Techniques:  Monthly Fugitive Dust Working Group Meetings  Data collection at construction sites (baseline data to understand current practices) and controlled observations (to test how applying the best management practices outlined in the manual reduces dust generation) PHASE 4: Additional Outreach Timeframe: September 2015 – February 2016 Key Messages: What remaining concerns do you have on this project? Tools and Techniques:  Council Work Session (February 9)  Additional outreach to the business community, e.g., the Northern Colorado Homebuilders Association, Chamber of Commerce Local Legislative Affairs Committee, etc.  Recommendations from Boards and Commissions PHASE 4: (If Adopted) Training and Public Outreach Timeframe: April 2016 – December 2016 Key Messages: This is how to implement the Dust Prevention and Control Manual – from either an enforcement perspective or a contractor perspective Tools and Techniques:  Training sessions will include presentations that include a general overview of the changes to the Code, the guidance manual, and requirements of individual parties. Training sessions will be conducted with a) all City staff, including front line building staff; b) City inspectors; c) Contractors, developers, etc. (including both City and private sector staff that generate dust).  Enforcement materials will include draft enforcement worksheet that will be completed by inspectors in the field, the draft spreadsheet for tracking enforcement, and a Sharepoint site to manage the various inspection documents.  Outreach is designed to inform the general public about the regulations that have been adopted. Staff intends to develop a communication plan that includes both traditional notifications, e.g., Utility mailer, as well as social media. Staff will work with the Communications and Public Involvement Office to craft these materials. *The Fort Collins SAT was developed by modifying the Triple Bottom Line (TBL) Analysis Tool developed by Eugene, Oregon, July 2009. 1 SUSTAINABILITY ASSESSMENT SUMMARY DATE: November 2015 SUBJECT: Sustainability Assessment (SA) Summary for Dust Prevention and Control Strategies Key issues identified:  Dust control proposal will likely reduce fugitive dust, leading to improved human health for residents and workers at dust-generating sties, improved safety, and improved aesthetics such as visual air quality.  Overall, proposal will have a positive impact on the environment by reducing particulate matter emission into the air and water. Proposal may result in more water use. Proposal may result in more waste generation from increased use of wind barriers.  Although many companies already employ dust mitigations strategies, and mitigation strategies are required by county and state government for dust-generating sources greater than five acres, the cost associated with implementing control measures not previously required could negatively impact those businesses. Suggested mitigation actions:  Dust control ordinance could be over-ridden by City Council at times where a drought conditions exist.  At least some wind barrier materials could be recycled. Economic , -1.1 Social , 1.7 Environmental 1.8 Rating Average, 0.8 -4.0 -3.0 -2.0 -1.0 0.0 1.0 2.0 3.0 4.0 Sustainability Rating Rating without mitigation Rating with mitigation Rating Legend 3 Very positive 2 Moderately positive 1 Slightly positive 0 Not relevant or neutral -1 Slightly negative -2 Moderately negative, impact likely -3 Very negative, impact expected ATTACHMENT 4 *The Fort Collins SAT was developed by modifying the Triple Bottom Line (TBL) Analysis Tool developed by Eugene, Oregon, July 2009. 2 City of Fort Collins SUSTAINABILITY ASSESSMENT TOOL (SAT) (Completed November 2015) Creating a sustainable community Plan Fort Collins is an expression of the community’s resolve to act sustainably: to systemically, creatively, and thoughtfully utilize environmental, human, and economic resources to meet our present needs and those of future generations without compromising the ecosystems upon which we depend. How to use the tool The Sustainability Assessment Tool (SAT) is designed to inform a deeper understanding of how policy and program choices affect the social equity, environmental health and economic health of the community. The City of Fort Collins has developed a Sustainability Assessment Framework that describes the purpose, objectives, and guidelines to assist City Program/Project Managers to determine: • The process for cross-department collaboration in using the SAT • Timing for applying a SAT • When to apply a SAT • How to document the results of the SAT and present at City Council Work Sessions and Regular Council Meetings Further detailed guidance is available at: http://citynet.fcgov.com/sustainability/sustainabilityassessments.php The SAT does not dictate a particular course of action; rather, the analysis provides policy makers and staff with a greater awareness of some of the trade-offs, benefits and consequences associated with a proposal, leading to more mindful decision-making. Brief description of proposal Please provide a brief description of your proposal – 100 words or less The City has developed a proposed ordinance to adopt municipal code language and a Dust Prevention and Control Manual that establishes minimum requirements consistent with nationally recognized practices for controlling fugitive dust emissions, and identifies additional dust control measures that could be used to prevent off-property transport or off-vehicle transport of fugitive dust emissions for 12 specific dust generating activities. The objective of the City’s fugitive dust control program is to prevent health and ecosystem impacts as well as nuisances from dust emissions through the application of readily available and generally accepted dust control measures. Staff lead(s): Please note staff name, position/division and phone number Lindsay Ex, Environmental Program Manager Environmental Services Department (970) 224-6143 3 Social Equity Described: Placing priority upon protecting, respecting, and fulfilling the full range of universal human rights, including those pertaining to civil, political, social, economic, and cultural concerns. Providing adequate access to employment, food, housing, clothing, recreational opportunities, a safe and healthy environment and social services. Eliminating systemic barriers to equitable treatment and inclusion, and accommodating the differences among people. Emphasizing justice, impartiality, and equal opportunity for all. Goal/Outcome: It is our priority to support an equitable and adequate social system that ensures access to employment, food, housing, clothing, education, recreational opportunities, a safe and healthy environment and social services. Additionally, we support equal access to services and seek to avoid negative impact for all people regardless of age, economic status, ability, immigration or citizenship status, race/ethnicity, gender, relationship status, religion, or sexual orientation. Equal opportunities for all people are sought. A community in which basic human rights are addressed, basic human needs are met, and all people have access to tools and resources to develop their capacity. This tool will help identify how the proposal affects community members and if there is a difference in how the decisions affect one or more social groups. Areas of consideration in creating a vibrant socially equitable Fort Collins are: basic needs, inclusion, community safety, culture, neighborhoods, and advancing social equity. Analysis Prompts • The prompts below are examples of the issues that need to be addressed. They are not a checklist. Not all prompts and issues will be relevant for any one project. Issues not covered by these prompts may be very pertinent to a proposal - please include them in the analysis.  Is this proposal affected by any current policy, procedure or action plan? Has advice been sought from organizations that have a high level of expertise, or may be significantly affected by this proposal? Proposal Description 1. Meeting Basic Human Needs • How does the proposal impact access to food, shelter, employment, health care, educational and recreational opportunities, a safe and healthy living environment or social services? • Does this proposal affect the physical or mental health of individuals, or the status of public health in our community? • How does this proposal contribute to helping people achieve and maintain an adequate standard of living, including housing, or food affordability, employment opportunities, healthy families, or other resiliency factors? Analysis/Discussion  Increased dust control can improve the health of residents who otherwise would be subject to fugitive dust emissions, esp. keeping in mind ¼ of Fort Collins households have a member who has a respiratory illness. This could lead to decreased costs for doctor or hospital visits.  Dust control can improve worker health or reduce risk of health problems at the site of the dust generating activity. Dust that contains silica or toxic materials can be especially harmful.  Dust control can also improve indoor air quality and reduce the amount of particulates that are tracked in a home.  Reducing or eliminating blowing dust in traffic areas and the improved visibility will improve safety for drivers, bicyclists, pedestrians, etc.  The whole objective of the proposal is to prevent health and ecosystem impacts from fugitive dust. 2. Addressing Inequities and being Inclusive • Are there any inequities to specific population subsets in this proposal? If so, how will they be addressed?  The proposal will provide increased relief to neighborhoods/residents who experience the impacts of fugitive dust while any additional costs for 4 • Does this proposal meet the standards of the Americans with Disabilities Act? • How does this proposal support the participation, growth and healthy development of our youth? Does it include Developmental Assets? • If the proposal affects a vulnerable section of our community (i.e. youth, persons with disabilities, etc.) implementation may be passed on to a larger group of customers.  The EPA’s Web page on PM states ‘According to the American Academy of Pediatrics, children and infants are among the most susceptible to many air pollutants. Children have increased exposure compared with adults because of higher minute ventilation and higher levels of physical activity.”  People with heart or lung diseases, children and older adults are the most likely to be affected by particle pollution exposure. However, even if you are healthy, you may experience temporary symptoms from exposure to elevated levels of particle pollution. 3. Ensuring Community Safety • How does this proposal address the specific safety and personal security needs of groups within the community, including women, people with disabilities, seniors, minorities, religious groups, children, immigrants, workers and others?  The proposal will increase safety of everyone who otherwise would have been experiencing fugitive dust emission (work site employees, drivers and bicyclists, pedestrians and neighbors) 4. Culture • Is this proposal culturally appropriate and how does it affirm or deny the cultures of diverse communities? • How does this proposal create opportunities for artistic and cultural expression?  Citizen surveys have repeatedly shown that Fort Collins citizens value good visual air quality and mountain views. Controlling dust would reduce visual impairment and increase good visibility in Fort Collins.  The proposal will not have a negative impact on minorities.  Proposal may influence citizens’ perspective of the City government either favorably or negatively. 5. Addressing the Needs of Neighborhoods • How does this proposal impact specific Fort Collins neighborhoods? • How are community members, stakeholders and interested parties provided with opportunities for meaningful participation in the decision making process of this proposal? • How does this proposal enhance neighborhoods and stakeholders’ sense of commitment and stewardship to our community?  Urban fugitive dust concerns are often localized in nature. Controlling dust will aid neighborhoods or individuals who have dust concerns.  There has been significant outreach regarding this proposal include 2 open houses, an on-line survey, individual meetings with stakeholders, meetings with stakeholder groups, a Fugitive Dust Working group, and discussion with many staff departments. 6. Building Capacity to Advance Social Equity • What plans have been made to communicate about and share the activities and impacts of this proposal within the City organization and/or the community? • How does this proposal strengthen collaboration and cooperation between the City organization and community members?  Staff will engage with the private sector dust-generating activities to 5  ESD staff will provide training on inspection and enforcement to City inspectors who are routinely in the field for other inspections, and will also provide info to Admin and other staff in departments who might encounter calls/questions about the dust control program. Social Equity Summary Key issues: Dust control proposal will likely reduce fugitive dust, leading to improved human health for residents and workers at dust-generating sties, improved safety, and improved aesthetics such as visual air quality. Potential mitigation strategies: Overall, the effect of this proposal on social equity would be: Please reach a consensus or take a group average on the rating, enter an “x” in one of the following boxes and indicate the overall rating. Rating represents group consensus Rating represents group average +1.7 +3 +2 +1 0 -1 -2 -3 Very positive Moderately positive Slightly positive Not relevant or neutral Slightly negative Moderately negative, impact likely Very negative, impact expected Environmental Health Described: Healthy, resilient ecosystems, clean air, water, and land. Decreased pollution and waste, lower carbon emissions that contribute to climate change, lower fossil fuel use, decreased or no toxic product use. Prevent pollution, reduce use, promote reuse, and recycle natural resources. Goal/Outcome: Protect, preserve, and restore the natural environment to ensure long-term maintenance of ecosystem functions necessary for support of future generations of all species. Avoid or eliminate adverse environmental impacts of all activities, continually review all activities to identify and implement strategies to prevent pollution; reduce energy consumption and increase energy efficiency; conserve water; reduce consumption and waste of natural resources; reuse, recycle and purchase recycled content products; reduce reliance on non-renewable resources. Analysis Prompts • The prompts below are examples of issues that need to be addressed. They are not a checklist. Not all prompts and issues will be relevant for any one project. Issues not covered by these prompts may be very pertinent to a proposal - please include them in the analysis. 6 • Is this proposal affected by any current policy, procedure or action plan? Has advice been sought from organizations that have a high level of expertise, or may be significantly affected by this proposal? 1. Environmental Impact • Does this proposal affect ecosystem functions or processes related to land, water, air, or plant or animal communities? • Will this proposal generate data or knowledge related to the use of resources? • Will this proposal promote or support education in prevention of pollution, and effective practices for reducing, reusing, and recycling of natural resources? • Does this proposal require or promote the continuous improvement of the environmental performance of the City organization or community? • Will this proposal affect the visual/landscape or aesthetic elements of the community? Analysis/Discussion  Fugitive dust can harm ecosystems so controlling dust will reduce or minimize harmful ecosystem impacts (i.e. harm plant growth, water quality, air quality).  Implementation of the proposal will raise awareness for dust-generating sources about pollution prevention and dust control best management practices.  If mis-applied, chemical stabilization agents can harm ecosystem health.  Controlling dust will improve the visual and aesthetic environment in Fort Collins, as well as air quality  Implementation of the proposal will likely increase water use for wet suppression and therefore not support water conservation goals. 2. Climate Change • Does this proposal directly generate or require the generation of greenhouse gases (such as through electricity consumption or transportation)? • How does this proposal align with the carbon reduction goals for 2020 goal adopted by the City Council? • Will this proposal, or ongoing operations result in an increase or decrease in greenhouse gas emissions? • How does this proposal affect the community’s efforts to reduce greenhouse gas emissions or otherwise mitigate adverse climate change activities? The proposal may have very minor positive or negative impacts on GHG emissions. Would reduce GHG emissions:  Reduced vehicle speeds might use less fuel per mile than higher speeds.  If causes reduction in use of mechanical blowing  Carbon sequestration would increase from revegetation efforts. Would increase GHG emissions:  Increased water use and the GHG emissions associated with water treatment  Increased driving if conducting more site inspection visits 3. Protect, Preserve, Restore • Does this proposal result in the development or modification of land resources or ecosystem functions? • Does this proposal align itself with policies and procedures related to the preservation or restoration of natural habitat, greenways, protected wetlands, migratory pathways, or the urban growth boundary • How does this proposal serve to protect, preserve, or restore important ecological functions or processes? 7 4. Pollution Prevention • Does this proposal generate, or cause to be generated, waste products that can contaminate the environment? • Does this proposal require or promote pollution prevention through choice of materials, chemicals, operational practices and/or engineering controls? • Does this proposal require or promote prevention of pollution from toxic substances or other pollutants regulated by the state or federal government? • Will this proposal create significant amounts of waste or pollution?  Use of chemical stabilization agents can have harmful environmental impacts.  The Dust Manual prohibits the use of asphalt-based chemical stabilizers. 5. Rethink, Replace, Reduce, Reuse, Recirculate/Recycle • Does this proposal prioritize the rethinking of the materials or goods needed, reduction of resource or materials use, reuse of current natural resources or materials or energy products, or result in byproducts that are recyclable or can be re-circulated?  Proposal may result in increased slurry and associated clean up needs.  Proposal may increase waste from disposal of used wind barrier material. NOTE: this could be mitigated through recycling of the material.) 6. Emphasize Local • Does this proposal emphasize use of local materials, vendors, and or services to reduce resources and environmental impact of producing and transporting proposed goods and materials? • Will the proposal cause adverse environmental effects somewhere other than the place where the action will take place?  Proposal may benefit those outside City limits (i.e. in the GMA) by preventing dust from being transported out of the city.  Proposal could foster a tool-sharing opportunity for certain dust suppression tools. Environmental Health Summary Key issues: Overall, proposal will have a positive impact on the environment by reducing particulate matter emission into the air and water. Proposal may result in more water use. Proposal may result in more waste generation from increased use of wind barriers. Potential mitigation strategies: Dust control ordinance could be over-ridden by City Council at times where a drought conditions exist. At least some wind barrier materials could be recycled. Overall, the effect of this proposal on environmental health would be: Please reach a consensus or take a group average on the rating, enter an “x” in one of the following boxes and indicate the overall rating. Rating represents group consensus Rating represents group average +1.8 +3 +2 +1 0 -1 -2 -3 Very positive Moderately positive Slightly positive Not relevant or neutral Slightly negative Moderately 8 Economic Health Described: Support of healthy local economy with new jobs, businesses, and economic opportunities; focus on development of a diverse economy, enhanced sustainable practices for existing businesses, green and clean technology jobs, creation or retention of family waged jobs. Goal/Outcome: A stable, diverse and equitable economy; support of business development opportunities. Analysis Prompts • The prompts below are examples of the issues that need to be addressed. They are not a checklist. Not all prompts and issues will be relevant for any one project. Issues not covered by these prompts may be very pertinent to a proposal - please include them in the analysis • Is this proposal affected by any current policy, procedure or action plan? Has advice been sought from organizations that have a high level of expertise, or may be significantly affected by this proposal? 1. Infrastructure and Government • How will this proposal benefit the local economy? • If this proposal is an investment in infrastructure is it designed and will it be managed to optimize the use of resources including operating in a fossil fuel constrained society? • Can the proposal be funded partially or fully by grants, user fees or charges, staged development, or partnering with another agency? • How will the proposal impact business growth or operations (ability to complete desired project or remain in operation), such as access to needed permits, infrastructure and capital? Analysis/Discussion  Proposal may harm local private sector who engages in dust generating activities if they have to implement controls that have added cost.  Proposal may benefit companies who offer dust suppression services.  Proposal does not introduce any new permits or fees.  Proposal may decrease workers comp costs if employees are exposed to less dust pollution.  Proposal is likely to increase the amount of staff times spent inspecting and enforcing dust control, but should result in better outcomes.  may either add net add work load to existing staff for conducting inspections/do enforcement or reduce net time spent by multiple staff responding to dust complaints with no enforcement approach available. 2. Employment and Training • What are the impacts of this proposal on job creation within Larimer County? • Are apprenticeships, volunteer or intern opportunities available? • How will this proposal enhance the skills of the local workforce?  Likely minimal impact on job creation unless City inspection needs rise to level of needed new staff resources that are funded.  Implementation of dust program could add an intern or graduate student job opportunities.  Proposal will provide training to city staff and dust generators on dust control BMPs. 3. Diversified and Innovative Economy • How does this proposal support innovative or entrepreneurial activity? • Will “clean technology” or “green” jobs be created in this proposal?  Proposal could support research into environmentally preferable chemical stabilizers or alternative methods for dust suppression from street sweeping. 9 • How will the proposal impact start-up or existing businesses or development projects? 4. Support or Develop Sustainable Businesses • What percentage of this proposal budget relies on local services or products? Identify purchases from Larimer County and the State of Colorado. • Will this proposal enhance the tools available to businesses to incorporate more sustainable practices in operations and products? • Are there opportunities to profile sustainable and socially responsible leadership of local businesses or educate businesses on triple bottom line practices?  Proposal does enhance the tools available to local businesses by providing clarity about dust suppression BMP as discussed in the manual.  Proposal could benefit local companies that provide dust suppression services.  Businesses excelling at dust suppression could be showcased for their exemplary efforts. 5. Relevance to Local Economic Development Strategy  Proposal could benefit local companies that provide dust suppression services. Economic Prosperity Summary Key issues: Although many companies already employ dust mitigations strategies, and mitigation strategies are required by county and state government for dust-generating sources greater than five acres, the cost associated with implementing control measures not previously required could negatively impact those businesses. Potential mitigation strategies: Overall, the effect of this proposal on economic prosperity will be: Please reach a consensus or take a group average on the rating, enter an “x” in one of the following boxes and indicate the overall rating. Rating represents group consensus Rating represents group average -1.1 +3 +2 +1 0 -1 -2 -3 Very positive Moderately positive Slightly positive Not relevant or neutral Slightly negative Moderately negative, impact likely Very negative, impact expected Page 1 MINUTES CITY OF FORT COLLINS AIR QUALITY ADVISORY BOARD Date: Monday, March 21, 2016 Location: Community Room, 215 N. Mason Street Time: 5:30–8:00pm For Reference John Shenot, Chair Ross Cunniff, Council Liaison 970-420-7398 Lucinda Smith, Interim Staff Liaison 970-224-6085 Board Members Present Board Members Absent Rich Fisher John Shenot, Chair +Gregory Miller Robert Kirkpatrick Jim Dennison +Vara Vissa (6:00) +Tom Griggs +Mark Houdashelt +Chris Wood Staff Present Lindsay Ex, Staff Liaison/Environmental Program Manager Dianne Tjalkens, Admin/Board Support Cassie Archuleta, Environmental Planner Councilmembers Present Guests None Call to order: 5:31pm … AGENDA ITEM 3: Fugitive Dust Ordinance Lindsay Ex updated the Board on the work done by staff and the Fugitive Dust Working Group since City Council’s February 9 work session. April 5 going to Council Work Session. 1. Leading by Example: the manual will be part of City project policy—will start immediately, except for existing contracts. 2. Data on Costs: determined minimum and maximum costs per single family home based on infill, greenfield, size, etc. 3. Monitoring/Tracking: have developed system to track and act on complaints. 4. Hybrid Approach: concerns for housing affordability, developed hybrids as result. a. Proposing all projects must prevent, minimize and control dust b. All projects must apply BMPs for materials transport and saw cutting. c. Manual is used for residential projects over 10Ksf. d. Manual applies to projects under 10Ksf if two written warnings per year. e. If not preventing off-property transport must apply at least one additional BMP. Going to Planning and Zoning Board for recommendation. DRAFT ATTACHMENT 5 Page 2 Comments/Q&A  What accounts for range between minimum and maximum costs? o Maximum assumes that will have to use additional BMPs because minimum required dust suppression is not working.  Can we accelerate implementation? Will miss this construction season. Can we have soft enforcement sooner with training and education? o Did previous recommendation support delayed enforcement?  Supported December enforcement.  Difficult to move soft enforcement into summer?  Goes to Council in April. Could there be a notice that goes to all construction to read website and begin practicing?  Need to determine what earliest date could be. Many teams involved in enforcement.  Opportunity to be a good neighbor.  Don’t want to push Council too much when finally starting to take action. o Proactively educate community. o Clarification: If builder with contiguous lots, become a site larger than 10Ksf.  Know what is coming up because of building permits. o Over 70% of building permits were over 10Ksf. o Should be about dust generating potential, rather than arbitrary cut-off.  By including saw cutting, covered loads, and two warnings, address the largest dust generating activities. o Includes renovations, road building, etc.?  Would include checklist for smaller projects. Have email list for all contractors in community.  What percentage of dust problem does this solve? o Never had a complaint on construction of a single family home site. o Applies to large residential and all commercial developments. o Ozone is regional problem; this is a problem of a small area. Good neighbor policy.  What about properties that have both commercial and residential? o Will have to look at attorney’s language for mixed use sites.  Some residential lots are larger than 10Ksf. Important to build awareness. Ex: reducing speeds on dirt roads, esp. on private properties. Community should be made aware. o 80% of all single family residential is under 10Ksf. o Council is okay with compromise because tracking system allows staff to determine where the problems are. Have never had complaints on single family homes. Costs are high to apply to single family homes. Rich moved and Tom seconded a motion to support the following recommendation to Council: The Air Quality Advisory Board continues to recommend adoption of the Dust Prevention and Control Manual for all projects within the community. However, if Council chooses to adopt a hybrid approach as proposed by City staff, then the Board recommends prompt adoption of such approach and encourages staff to initiate soft enforcement as quickly as possible to ensure that contractors and the general public are made aware of these standards during the 2016 construction season. Motion passed unanimously, 6-0-0. ACTION ITEMS: Lindsay will look more into when soft enforcement of ordinance could begin. Land Conservation and Stewardship Board Page 2 Public Comments: None Action Items: Dust Control Manual – Melissa Hovey Due to an increase in development in the city and more and more complaints about dust City Council requested the City Environmental Services Division propose code changes to the current regulations to implement the best practices outlined in the Dust Prevention and Control Manual. Health and environmental impacts from particulate matter are causing this to be a priority for the department to close the gap in regulations and enforcement actions. Environmental Services is seeking LCSB support for the municipal code change, a Dust Guidance Manual and an internal policy and public outreach effort. No new fees would be implemented; this is using existing staff in the field to respond to complaints. This is less active than some of enforcement procedures so it’s mostly based on a complaint and enforcement actions. This does not require any new permits, additional inspections, extra requirements or additional fees. We are not expecting zero dust, but the enforcement would address whether or not you are following dust control guidelines. Applicable activities that would most affect the Natural Areas Department would be any and all earthmoving activities, track out/carry out activities, unpaved roads and haul roads. Melissa listed the site where a dust control survey can be taken by the general public http://www.fcgov.com/airquality/fugitive-dust.php . Kelly reported that this issue isn’t going before Council for a year and wanted to know why. Melissa – I don’t know why, but I did inquire as to whether or not that was accurate and was told yes. We are hoping that maybe after April that we can bring this issue back. Kelly proposed it might be brought back to the table after the election. Melissa reported that there has been much industry push back, specifically with the regulations because most industry has their own dust control management practices in place and feel the code to be duplicative of what they are currently doing. Kathryn – Would it be helpful to have the general public write in to Council supporting the issue? Melissa- We are directing the public to go to Fort Collins Access and make an initial record of it versus just writing a letter. Kathryn – At what level is dust classified as fugitive and how do you define the term fugitive and then how do you go about measuring this? Land Conservation & Stewardship Board February 11, 2015 ATTACHMENT 6 Land Conservation and Stewardship Board Page 3 Melissa – The word fugitive means that it does not come from a stack chimney or vent, it’s just out blowing around. We use EPA guidelines to help us measure it. Trudy - Would it be helpful to submit a letter, from the board, to Council asking them to put the item back on the agenda? Kelly – It seems like there has to be a better way to get people to comply with the regulations and I understand the goal is compliance, but it’s not punitive. Melissa – The goal is to get someone from our staff, on the property to enforce the rules. Kathryn – How do you prove infraction? Melissa – Basically we are asking if you are doing this type of activity then are you using these management practices. There is an assumption that dust emissions transferred over the property line and if that’s the case then dust control measures must be in place. Kelly – I would really like the LCSB to support this in the strongest way possible. Where is the push back coming from? Melissa - The larger guys that have worked out of state understand the regulations, but the smaller size businesses that have only operated in northern Colorado are unfamiliar with this, they are fearful of it, it’s new and they are quickly reading a 40 page manual and simply can’t afford it. We’ve been very successful meeting with these smaller companies. It’s an education hurdle to overcome but after we talk with them and give them the information they become supportive of the idea. Kathryn - I support this because of the health implications, especially for children. The asthma rate is very high right now and seems to be getting worse. Edward – Would there be a need to put in the letter what the stakes are, in this, for the Natural Areas Department or are we just voicing an opinion on this. Mark – We have a huge stake in this issue. Rick Bachand and Justin Scharton reviewed this as well because we have some operations that this affects. We do a lot of earth moving projects and agricultural projects so we certainly have concerns. We didn’t think there was anything in the manual that we wouldn’t live up to. Those concerns are also listed in the Dust Control memorandum that was sent out. Trudy – Wasn’t it clear in the memo you sent out how this affect the Natural Areas Department? Mark –Yes. Trudy Haines made a motion to send a letter to City Council recommending the item be put back on the March agenda and that City Council approve the proposed Code changes to implement the best practices outline in the Dust Prevention and Control Manual developed by the Environmental Services Department.. Kathryn Grimes seconded the motion. The motion was unanimously approved. Land Conservation and Stewardship Board Page 4 Mark agreed to leave the memorandum as is and just add the language to encourage the item to be placed on the March City Council agenda. Environmental Services 215 N. Mason PO Box 580 Fort Collins, CO 80522 970.221-6600 970.224-6177 - fax fcgov.com MEMORANDUM NATURAL RESOURCES ADVISORY BOARD DATE: December 17, 2015 TO: Mayor and City Council Members FROM: John Bartholow, on behalf of the Natural Resources Advisory Board (NRAB) SUBJECT: Recommendation on Fugitive Dust Control The NRAB has twice reviewed draft guidelines for controlling fugitive dust in Fort Collins prepared by the Environmental Services Department, a problem arising from citizen nuisance complaints and dutifully addressed by Staff. We are swayed by the need for, and the multiple benefits of, dust control, both for the health of our citizens and of our many wetlands and waterways, as well as supplementing ongoing efforts to darken our nighttime skies. The guidelines seem appropriate, not overly costly or invasive, and very much in line with similar nuisance dust guidelines in other areas of the arid west. We urge Council to put the Fugitive Dust Control elements in place by amending the Municipal and Land Use Codes, adopting the Dust Control Manual, and approving any other actions necessary to support this common sense dust control effort. Respectfully submitted, John Bartholow Chair, Natural Resources Advisory Board cc: Darin Atteberry, City Manager Susie Gordon, Sr. Environmental Planner ATTACHMENT 7 Parks & Recreation Board Meeting – December 2, 2015 Page 1 of 5 Full Minutes AGENDA ITEMS: Fugitive Dust Presentation - Lindsay Ex, Environmental Program Manager Lindsay explained to the P&R Board that the reason for the presentation was because there are implementation implications for Parks with regards to the proposed Municipal and Land Use Code changes that acknowledge the fugitive dust manual and align existing requirement; but staff is seeking a recommendation from the P&R Board to adopt the proposed Fugitive Dust Standards. Fugitive dust is solid particles suspended in the air that don’t pass through any type of filter or vent. There are existing regulations in place at the State and County level, but existing Fort Collins regulations are difficult to enforce. The manual and proposed Municipal and Land Use Code changes are meant to help close the “gaps” and provide clear and upfront guidance on how to comply and alleviate the inconsistencies across the City. The regulation standards only apply if dust is transported off property. Through air monitoring and air emissions data we can show that there are air quality concerns. In addition, staff responds to 50-100 citizen concerns/complaints in a year. The City is proposing an approach to the fugitive dust issue by updating the Municipal & Land Use Codes to reflect the standards established by the fugitive dust manual, supporting the fugitive dust manual which addresses 12 dust generating activities and provides multiple options for compliance depending on the activity which can significantly reduce fugitive dust, providing training, and ensuring there is significant public outreach. Some implications to adopting the fugitive dust requirements are related the cost. There are low-cost solutions in some cases that could include wet suppression or minimizing drop heights on equipment. However, there are other solutions that have a much higher cost such as high wind restrictions or the need purchase different equipment to do a job that will reduce dust (i.e., a street sweeper with a vacuum). Discussion Board – Who is responsible for the compliance, a contractor or sub-contractor? Staff – We would be looking at who was most culpable, but it’s not so much about citations as it is about compliance. There will be a lot of teaching moments. Board – How does CSU fit into this? Staff – They are regulated and controlled by the State and Federal Government, so the City doesn’t have any enforcement abilities. Board – A good contact at CSU if the City wants to reach out to establish a fugitive dust partnership would be Steve Reynolds. He is a Professor and Associate Department Head for Environmental and Radiological Health at CSU and dust is his “gig”. He would be a great ambassador. Staff – Thank you for the information. Board – How are you measuring the success of this regulation? Staff – We will probably measure through compliance and complaints. Board – It would be a great project goal if you could find a way to measure the air quality long-term since the purpose is about better air quality. Staff – We could potentially take dust tracking and continue to measure site by site, but monitoring overall air quality is very difficult with the limited equipment we have. Board – It seems that measuring air quality would be a more proactive/positive approach. Board – Have there been any complaints on horse riding facilities? Staff – Not that I’m aware of, but they are covered in the manual. Board – What are the scope of complaints? Are they on homeowners or constructions sites? My concern would be if the measurement was complaint driven, it would adversely affect small businesses and homeowners. Staff – Most complaints are on large construction sites. I’m not aware of any complaints on homeowners, but we would be working with a homeowner by providing options, not typically citations. Board – What about tree removal? Parks and Recreation Board December 2, 2015 ATTACHMENT 8 Parks & Recreation Board Meeting – December 2, 2015 Page 2 of 5 Staff – Yes, landscaping is a part of the manual and it could include something like covering a load. Board – What about chipping? Staff – Sawdust is typically due to a dull blade, and you have to remember fugitive dust is what leaves the property. It’s not an issue when it’s on the property. Staff – Using best practice intentions with options will help keep us in compliance. Board – Does Parks support with the Fugitive Dust Standards? Staff – Yes. Ragan Adams made a motion to approve support for the Fugitive Dust Standards proposal. Seconded by Bruce Henderson VOTE: 9:0 in favor to approve No further discussion Planning & Zoning Board December 17, 2015 Page1 Project: Fugitive Dust Regulation & Guidance Manual Project Description: This is a request for a Recommendation to City Council regarding various revisions to the Land Use Code related to a comprehensive approach to governing fugitive dust on a city- wide basis. The proposed revisions have been initiated by the Environmental Services Department and are intended to work in conjunction with a larger set of proposed revisions to City Code that will be considered by City Council on January 5, 2016. In addition, a Dust Prevention and Control Manual will be provided describing best practices for a variety of activities and industries and at various scales. Revisions to the Land Use Code must first be evaluated by the Planning and Zoning Board before City Council First Reading. These revisions are being brought to the Planning and Zoning Board outside the annual update process in order to ensure that complete package of all code revisions, including the Dust Prevention and Control Manual, are forwarded to City Council in a comprehensive manner. Recommendation: Approval Staff and Applicant Presentations Environmental Planner Ex gave a brief staff presentation of this project, highlighting the prior concerns and what changes were developed. She recapped some statistics of the dust-generating activities and referenced the proposed guidance manual, which will provide a guideline for compliance with City standards. She stated that the proposed manual also includes "best management practices". Public Input: Jim Dennison, Liaison to the Air Quality Advisory Board, attended the hearing with the purpose of sharing the Board's recommendations. He reviewed the history of the City Council request for staff to put together a guidance manual for this. This has been a collaborative effort because it involves several City departments; a draft manual was prepared and adoption has been recommended. Board Questions and Staff Response Member Hart asked for clarification of the P&Z's role in this project, and Planner Ex stated that Staff is seeking a recommendation from the P&Z Board to adopt the proposed changes to the Land Use Code (LUC). Member Schneider asked if a final draft of the manual has been prepared at this time, and Assistant City Attorney Yatabe stated that the preliminary draft has been reviewed by the Legal Department, although future changes are still possible. Planner Ex indicated that the training and enforcement materials would be developed first of 2016, training would begin around March-April2016, and there would be a "soft roll-out" over the summer 2016 with firm enforcement beginning in late ATTACHMENT 9 Planning & Zoning Board December 17, 2015 Page2 2016- early 2017. Assuming that approximately 60% of dust complaints come from construction activity, Planner Ex also explained that regulations will remain in effect no matter the development scale, meaning it will apply to both improvement and development activity. Member Hart asked about the input obtained from the development community; Planner Ex stated that concerns arise primarily from a cost perspective. Member Heinz asked if the state or county may also benefit from these regulations, and Planner Ex reported that these groups are happy to utilize this plan. Member Hobbs asked to reiterate the enforcement of this process, even though it appears to be an ongoing process over time. Planner Ex stated that compliance is the goal with minimal citations being issued. Board Deliberation Vice Chair Kirkpatrick stated her appreciation of the development of this policy. Member Hart and Schneider both stated their concern with adopting a manual without having the benefit of its completion. There was some Board discussion about the lack of a manual at present, even though the Board members support the clean air initiatives overall. Member Hart made a motion that the Planning and Zoning Board recommend to City Council adoption of the land use changes listed on page 1 of the staff report. Member Hobbs seconded the motion. Vote: 5:1, with Member Schneider dissenting.  City of Fort Collins Administrative Policies 3.6 Air Quality C. Dust Control Purpose: “Fugitivedust”consistsprimarilyofsoilparticlesintheaircausedbywindandhumanactivitiessuchas excavating,demolition,abrasiveblasting,andotheractivities.Dustcauseshealthimpacts;safety, visibility,andaestheticissues;andisanuisancethatcancauseexpensivedamagetopropertyand machinery. TheCityconductsmanyactivitiesthatregularlyproducefugitivedust,orhavethepotentialtoproduce fugitivedust,suchasconstruction,demolition,earthmoving,stockpiling,orstreetsweeping. TheCityofFortCollinswishestoleadbyexamplebyadoptingtheDustPreventionandControlManual (March2016),the“DustControlManual”,intoCityAdministrativePoliciesinordertopreventor minimizenegativeimpactsfromfugitivedustfromCityactivities.AcopyoftheDustControlManualis availableathttp://citynet.fcgov.com/environmentalservices/  AlthoughtheDustControlManualhasbeendraftedtoapplytoanypersonwhoconducts,orisan owneroroperatorof,adustgeneratingactivitywithintheCityofFortCollinsandnotjusttheCity,ithas notyetbeenadoptedbyCouncilbyordinance.Accordingly,theDustControlManualasadoptedherein shallapplytotheCityofFortCollinswhenitisengaginginthespecificdustgeneratingactivities identifiedbeloworwithrespecttoitsownership,operation,orcontroloveralisteddustgenerating activityorsource.ExistingCitycontractswiththirdpartyvendorsthataredustͲgeneratingactivities shallbeconvertedasexpeditiouslyaspractical.UponadoptionoftheDustControlManualbyCouncil, theManualintheformadoptedbyordinanceshallapplytotheCity. A. CityDustͲGeneratingActivities DepartmentsshallplanforandimplementthebestmanagementpracticescontainedintheDustControl ManualwhentheyareinvolvedinactivitiesormanagingCityfacilitiesthatmaygeneratefugitivedustas describedintheManual,including: ¾ constructionactivities, ¾ earthmovingactivities, ¾ demolitionandrenovation, ¾ stockpiles,streetsweeping, ¾ trackͲout/carryoutactivities, ¾ bulkmaterialstransport, ¾ useormaintenanceofunpavedroadsandhaulroads, ¾ Cityparkinglots, ATTACHMENT 10  ¾ Cityopenareasandvacantlots, ¾ sawcuttingandgrinding, ¾ abrasiveblastingand ¾ mechanicalblowing, Citydepartmentsareresponsibleformakingchangesintheirdepartmentalpoliciesandprocedureto implementthebestmanagementpracticescalledforintheManual. Adustcontrolplanshallbedevelopedformajorcapitalimprovementordevelopmentprojectsoverfive acresinsizeandformajoroperationsoractivitiesthathavethepotentialtogeneratefugitivedust emissionsandexposethepublictoparticulatematterorcreateanairpollutionnuisance. B. CityStandardsandContracts Citydepartmentsthatdevelopconstructionstandardsorcontractspecificationsshallincorporate requirementsforcompliancewiththeDustPreventionandControlManualinthesedocuments.AllCity departmentsshalltakepromptandreasonablestepstoincorporatecompliancewiththeDust PreventionandControlManualintoallRFPs,bidsandcontractswithoutsidevendorsthatincludethe dustgeneratingactivitiesdescribedinSubsectionA.above.  April 5, 2016 Fugitive Dust Jackie Kozak Thiel, Lucinda Smith, Lindsay Ex ATTACHMENT 11 Purpose 2 • Update from the February 9, 2016 Work Session 1. Leading by Example 2. Additional data on costs for Single-family Homes 3. Monitoring/tracking system for complaints 4. Developing a hybrid approach (combine Options 1 and 3) • First Reading of Municipal and Land Use Code Changes What is the problem? 333 Over ¼ of Fort Collins’ households have a member with respiratory ailments • Impacts to the Public • Impacts to the City • Gaps in existing regulations 1. Leading by Example 4 • Council Direction: – Take action now regardless of Council adoption • Action Taken: – Adopted into Administrative Policy on March 22, 2016 2. Additional Data on Costs 5 • Council Direction: Obtain more data and clarify costs Project Dust Mitigation Cost Total Costs Dust Cost % of Overall Cost Required BMPs Additional BMPs Total Dust Costs Infill Single Family Home (SFH) – minimum $700 $0 $700 $353,620 0.2% Infill SFH – maximum $1,275 $6,080 $7,355 $360,275 3.4% Greenfield SFH – minimum $700 $0 $700 $587,530 0.1% Greenfield SFH – maximum $6,090 $8,580 $14,670 $600,000 2.4% Horsetooth and Timberline $32,420 $3,320 $35,740 $3,304,501 1.1% 222 Laporte $40,000 $10,000 $50,000 $10,000,000 0.5% 3. Monitoring/Tracking System 6 • Council Direction: – Ensure staff can track the overall # and discrete # of complaints – Use to assess if the approach adopted is working • Action taken – Tracking System Developed and Online 4. Hybrid Approach 7 • The Options: 1. Adopt Code Changes and Manual, delay enforcement 2. Adopt Code Changes and Manual, begin enforcement immediately 3. Adopt Code Changes only, use Manual as guidance if problems occur 4. Status Quo • Similarities of the First Three Options – All three options create an enforceable Ordinance – All three options apply to all scales of activities – All three options require covered loads 4. Hybrid Approach 8 • Council Direction: – Concerns with impacts on housing affordability – Explore what is the right threshold for applying Option 1 (the Manual is required) versus Option 3 (Clear Ordinance) • Action taken: – Staff explored four approaches to develop a “hybrid” – Reviewed these approaches with the Air Quality Advisory Board, Fugitive Dust Working Group, and the Planning and Zoning Board 4. Hybrid Approach 9 All Projects Must Prevent, Minimize and Control Dust All Projects Must Apply Bulk Materials Transport and Saw Cutting BMPs Manual is used as the standard for residential projects > 10,000 square feet Manual only required for residential projects <10,000 square feet if two written warnings issued within one year Required BMPs do not prevent off-property dust transport? Apply at least one additional BMP. 4. Hybrid Approach 10 • Proposed Enforcement Timeline: – May-June Develop training and enforcement materials – June-Aug Conduct training sessions – June-Oct Conduct public outreach – June/July-Oct Soft enforcement (no fines) – November 1 Official enforcement begins Feedback 11 • Air Quality Advisory Board – Continues to recommend adoption of the Manual for all projects – If Council proceeds with the hybrid, the Board recommends prompt adoption and to initiate soft enforcement as quickly as possible • Planning and Zoning Board – April 7 Hearing – Support for the hybrid approach during the March Work Session April 5, 2016 Fugitive Dust Jackie Kozak Thiel, Lucinda Smith, Lindsay Ex -1- ORDINANCE NO. 044, 2016 OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FORT COLLINS AMENDING CHAPTER 12 OF THE CODE OF THE CITY OF FORT COLLINS RELATED TO PARTICULATE MATTER EMISSIONS WHEREAS, on February 15, 2011, City Council approved Resolution 2011-015 adopting the City Plan, including the Environmental Health Vision that sets forth an aspirational goal of continuous improvements in air quality; and WHEREAS, City Plan also contains numerous policies supporting air quality, including Policy ENV 8.6 which directs staff to promote prevention of air pollution at its source as the highest priority approach in reducing air pollution emissions; and WHEREAS, in furtherance of the Air Quality Advisory Board’s 2015 Work Program, which calls for addressing fugitive dust as a priority air quality initiative, City staff has proposed amendment of Chapter 12 of the Fort Collins City Code to protect air quality by adopting dust control and prevention standards by adopting a “Dust Prevention and Control Manual”; and WHEREAS, in addition to preventing, mitigating, and minimizing dust, the City desires to create minimal impact to the Fort Collins housing market; and WHEREAS, City staff has vetted these proposed changes through a Fugitive Dust Working Group composed of contractors, interested stakeholders, and City staff, as well as through numerous public events and a project website; and WHEREAS, City staff a presented the proposed changes set forth in the Dust Prevention and Control Manual to the Parks and Recreation Board (December 2, 2015), Natural Resources Advisory Board (December 16, 2015), the Air Quality Advisory Board (December 21, 2015) and the Planning and Zoning Board (December 17, 2015) and all four Boards have recommended to the City Council that the standards set forth in the Dust Prevention and Control Manual be adopted; and WHEREAS, City Council has determined that the adoption of the best management practices and standards set forth in the Dust Prevention and Control Manual attached hereto as Exhibit “A” and incorporated herein by reference, is in the best interest of the City and its citizens and is necessary to protect the health, safety, and welfare of the public, including prevention of adverse impacts of fugitive dust to human health, property, natural areas and waters of the state, and other adverse environmental impacts. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FORT COLLINS as follows: Section 1. That the City Council hereby makes any and all determinations and findings contained in the recitals set forth above. -2- Section 2. That Chapter 12 of the Code of the City of Fort Collins is hereby amended by the addition of a new Article X which reads in its entirety as follows: ARTICLE X. PARTICULATE MATTER EMISSIONS 12-150. Purpose and Applicability. (a) The purpose of this Article is to protect the health, safety, and welfare of the public, including prevention of adverse impacts to human health, property, sensitive areas, waters of the state, and other adverse environmental impacts and to prevent visibility impairment and safety hazards caused by emissions of particulate matter into the air from human activities. (b) The provisions of this Article shall: (1) Apply to any person who conducts or is an owner or operator of, a dust generating activity or source within the City limits. (2) Apply to City activities that constitute a dust generating activity or source, except as set forth in subsection (b)(3) below. (3) Not apply to operations conducted by: (i) any state or federal agency; or (ii) the City, or any county, state, or federal agency in response to a local emergency as defined in Code §2-666. 12-151. Definitions. The following words, terms and phrases, when used in this Article, shall have the meanings ascribed to them in this Section. Words, terms and phrases defined in the Dust Prevention and Control Manual shall have the meaning set forth therein. Dust Prevention and Control Manual or dust control manual shall mean the Dust Prevention and Control Manual that describes applicable dust control measures as adopted by City Council in Ordinance No. 044, 2016, and any subsequent revisions. Dust control measures shall mean any action or process that is used to prevent or mitigate the emission of fugitive dust into the air, including but not limited to, the best management practices as identified in the Dust Prevention and Control Manual. Dust generating activity or source shall mean a process, operation, action, or land use that creates emissions of fugitive dust or causes off-property or off-vehicle transport, all as more fully set forth in the Dust Prevention and Control Manual. Residential source shall mean a dust generating activity or source occurring on real property within the City that is (1) used or being developed for one or more dwelling units, (2) consists of a single lot or parcel containing not more than 10,000 square feet, -3- and (3) is not contiguous with any other real property which is a dust generating source and owned by the same person or entity. Fugitive dust shall mean solid particulate matter emitted into the air by mechanical processes or natural forces but is not emitted through a stack, chimney, or vent. Off-property transport shall mean the visible emission of fugitive dust beyond the property line of the property on which the emission originates or the project boundary when the emission originates in the public right-of-way or on public property. Off-vehicle transport shall mean the visible emission of fugitive dust from a vehicle that is transporting dust generating materials on a public road or right-of-way. Owner or operator shall mean any person who owns or has control over a dust generating activity source either by operating, supervising, controlling, or maintaining ownership of the activity or source including, but not limited to, a contractor, lessee, or other responsible party of an activity, operation, or land use that is a dust generating activity or source. Particulate matter shall mean any material which is emitted into the air as finely divided solid or liquid particles, other than uncombined water, and includes dust, smoke, soot, fumes, aerosols, and mists. 12-152. Adoption of Dust Prevention and Control Manual. (a) There is hereby adopted the Dust Prevention and Control Manual on file in the office of the City Clerk, which shall have the same force and effect as though set forth herein and shall be referred to as the dust control manual, for the purposes of protecting the health, safety, and general welfare of the public as set forth in Section 12-150(a) above. (b) A copy of the dust control manual adopted under this Section 12-152 shall be kept on file in the City Clerk’s office. (c) The City Manager may adopt such minor conditions, revisions, and corrections to the dust control manual as may, in his or her judgment, be necessary to better conform to and maintain consistency with nationally recognized practices for controlling fugitive dust emissions (referred to herein as “technical revisions”). The City Manager shall approve only those technical revisions that: (1) are consistent with all existing policies relevant to the revisions; (2) do not result in significant additional cost to the persons affected by the revisions; and (3) do not materially alter the standards with which persons must comply. -4- Upon adoption of any such technical revisions pursuant to the authority of this subsection, the City Manager shall provide to the City Clerk documentation of such technical revisions specifying the date upon which they shall become effective, and shall maintain said documentation on file in the permanent records of the City Clerk and available for public inspection. 12-153. Prevention of fugitive dust emissions. (a) Bulk Materials Transport: Any person who is an owner or lessee of property within the City on which a dust generating activity or source is located and for which vehicles are used to transport bulk materials to or from the property on a public or private road or on a public right-of-way shall comply with and expressly require all contractors and subcontractors to comply with the required best management practices and, to the extent set forth therein, the additional best management practices in Section 3.6 of the dust control manual. (b) Saw Cutting or Grinding: Any person, owner or operator that cuts or grinds asphalt, concrete, brick, tile, stone, or other masonry materials and whose operations are a dust generating activity or source shall comply with and expressly require all contractors and subcontractors to comply with the required best management practices and, to the extent set forth therein, the additional best management practices in Section 3.10 of the dust control manual. (c) Other Dust Generating Activities or Sources: Any person who conducts, or is an owner or operator of, a dust generating activity or source shall comply with the provisions of the dust control manual. (d) It shall not be considered a violation of this section if off-property transport of fugitive dust emissions occurs while dust control measures are being implemented to the extent required by the dust control manual. Sec. 12-154. Access to Private Property. Officers of the City enforcing the provisions of this Article are hereby authorized to enter upon any premises, excluding a dwelling unit or any structure, in the City for the purpose of inspection of any dust generating activity or source or for any purpose authorized by this Article or the dust control manual. Section 12-155 – 12-158. Reserved Sec. 12-159. Violations and penalties. Any person who violates §12-153 of this Article, commits a civil infraction and is subject to the penalty provisions of Subsection 1-15(f) of the Code. -5- Sec. 12-160 Limitations on violations and penalties-residential source. No owner or operator of a residential source is required to comply with the provisions of 12-153(c) or is subject to prosecution under that provision, unless, within one year immediately preceding the date of the alleged violation: (1) such owner or operator has been issued and served by personal service, served to the registered agent, or by certified mail, a written warning and notice stating that the subject property has yielded off-property transport of fugitive dust and that he or she must prevent, mitigate, and minimize fugitive dust; and (2) such owner or operator, after having been issued and served with the written warning in 12-160(1), is issued and has been served by personal service, served to the registered agent, or by certified mail, an additional written warning and notice that the subject property has after the service of such prior warning and notice yielded off-property transport of fugitive dust and that he or she must immediately comply with the provisions of 12-153(c). Section 3. The foregoing provisions enacted by this ordinance shall be effective on and shall and apply to all dust generating activities or sources on and after November 1, 2016. Notwithstanding the foregoing, the requirements set forth herein and in the dust control manual shall not be applied so as to impair any contracts in existence as of the date on which this ordinance becomes effective. Introduced, considered favorably on first reading, and ordered published this 5th day of April, A.D. 2016, and to be presented for final passage on the 19th day of April, A.D. 2016. __________________________________ Mayor ATTEST: _______________________________ City Clerk -6- Passed and adopted on final reading on the 19th day of April, A.D. 2016. __________________________________ Mayor ATTEST: _______________________________ City Clerk March 2016 Dust Prevention and Control Manual EXHIBIT A DRAFT Dust Prevention and Control Manual Do not cite or quote – Legal Review Pending Page i CONTENTS 1.0 Introduction 1 1.1 Title 1 1.2 Purpose of Manual 1 1.3 Applicability 1 1.4 Definitions 2 2.0 Fugitive Dust and the Problems it Causes 5 2.1 What is Fugitive Dust, Generally? 5 2.2 Why is the City Addressing Fugitive Dust? 5 2.3 Health and Environmental Effects 6 2.4 Nuisance and Aesthetics 6 2.5 Safety Hazard and Visibility 6 3.0 Best Management Practices 7 3.1 Earthmoving Activities 8 3.2 Demolition and Renovation 10 3.3 Stockpiles 12 3.4 Street Sweeping 14 3.5 Track-out / Carry-out 15 3.6 Bulk Materials Transport 16 3.7 Unpaved Roads and Haul Roads 18 3.8 Parking Lots 20 3.9 Open Areas and Vacant Lots 22 3.10 Saw Cutting and Grinding 24 3.11 Abrasive Blasting 26 3.12 Mechanical Blowing 28 4.0 Dust Control Plan for Land Development Greater Than Five Acres 30 5.0 Resources 34 5.1 Cross Reference to Codes, Standards, Regulations, and Policies 34 5.2 City of Fort Collins Manuals and Policies 37 5.3 References for Dust Control 37 DRAFT Dust Prevention and Control Manual Do not cite or quote – Legal Review Pending Page 1 1.0 Introduction 1.1 Title The contents of this document shall be known as the Dust Prevention and Control Manual (“the Manual”). 1.2 Purpose of Manual The purpose of the Manual is to establish minimum requirements consistent with nationally recognized best management practices for controlling fugitive dust emissions and to describe applicable best management practices to prevent, minimize, and mitigate off-property transport or off-vehicle transport of fugitive dust emissions pursuant to Article X of the Fort Collins City Code (§12-150 et. seq) for specific dust generating activities and sources. The purpose of Article X of the Code is to protect the health, safety, and welfare of the public, including prevention of adverse impacts to human health, property, sensitive vegetation and areas, waters of the state, and other adverse environmental impacts and to prevent visibility impairment and safety hazards caused by emissions of particulate matter into the air from human activities. 1.3 Applicability As set forth in Code §12-150, this Manual applies to any person who conducts, or is an owner or operator of, a dust generating activity or source, as defined in the Code and described in this Manual, within the City of Fort Collins, subject to the exclusion set forth in Code §12-15-(b)(3). DRAFT Dust Prevention and Control Manual Do not cite or quote – Legal Review Pending Page 2 1.4 Definitions Abrasive blasting shall mean a process to smooth rough surfaces; roughen smooth surfaces; and remove paint, dirt, grease, and other coatings from surfaces. Abrasive blasting media may consist of sand; glass, plastic or metal beads; aluminum oxide; corn cobs; or other materials. Additional best management practice shall mean using at least one additional measure if the required best management practices are ineffective at preventing off-property transport of particulate matter. Additional requirements shall mean when applicable, any measure that is required, e.g., a dust control plan when project sites are over 5 acres in size. Best management practice shall mean any action or process that is used to prevent or mitigate the emission of fugitive dust into the air. Bulk materials transport shall mean the carrying, moving, or conveying of loose materials including, but not limited to, earth, rock, silt, sediment, sand, gravel, soil, fill, aggregate, dirt, mud, construction or demolition debris, and other organic or inorganic material containing particulate matter onto a public road or right-of-way in an unenclosed trailer, truck bed, bin, or other container. Chemical stabilization shall mean the application of chemicals used to bind soil particles or increase soil moisture content, including, but not limited to, dust suppressants, palliatives, tackifiers, surfactants, and soil stabilizers. Asphalt-based products or any product containing cationic polyacrylamide or products deemed environmentally incompatible with Code §26-498, or defined as a pollutant per Code §26-491, or explicitly prohibited by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency or the state of Colorado may not be used for chemical stabilization. Water soluble plant- based oils or gums, clay additives, or other synthetic polymer emulsion that are non-toxic, non-combustible, and harmless to fish, wildlife, plants, pets, and humans may be used for chemical stabilization. Code shall mean the Fort Collins City Code, as amended from time to time. Dust control measure shall mean any action or process that is used to prevent or mitigate the emission of fugitive dust into the air, including but not limited to the best management practices identified in this Manual. Dust generating activity or source shall mean a process, operation, action, or land use DRAFT Dust Prevention and Control Manual Do not cite or quote – Legal Review Pending Page 3 processes or natural forces but is not emitted through a stack, chimney, or vent Local wind speed shall mean the current or forecasted wind speed for the Fort Collins area as measured at the surface weather observation station KFNL located at the Fort Collins Loveland Municipal Airport or at Colorado State University’s Fort Collins or Christman Field weather stations or as measured onsite with a portable or hand-held anemometer. The City will use anemometers whenever practicable. Maximum speed limit shall mean the speed limit on public rights-of-way adopted by the City pursuant to Fort Collins Traffic Code adopted pursuant to City Code Section 28-16 For private roadways, a speed limit shall be established as appropriate to minimize off-site transportation of. Mechanical blower shall mean any portable machine powered with an internal combustion or electric-powered engine used to blow leaves, clippings, dirt or other debris off sidewalks, driveways, lawns, medians, and other surfaces including, but not limited to, hand-held, back- pack and walk-behind units, as well as blower- vacuum units. Off-property transport shall mean the visible emission of fugitive dust beyond the property line of the property on which the emission originates or the project boundary when the emission originates in the public right-of-way or on public property. Off-vehicle transport shall mean the visible emission of fugitive dust from a vehicle that is transporting dust generating materials on a public road or right-of-way. On-tool local exhaust ventilation shall mean a vacuum dust collection system attached to a construction tool that includes a dust collector (hood or shroud), tubing, vacuum, and a high efficiency particulate air (HEPA) filter. On-tool wet dust suppression shall mean the operation of nozzles or sprayers attached to a construction tool that continuously apply water or other liquid to the grinding or cutting area by a pressurized container or other water source. Open area shall mean any area of undeveloped land greater than one-half acre that contains less than 70 percent vegetation. This includes undeveloped lots, vacant or idle lots, natural areas, parks, or other non-agricultural areas. Recreational and multi-use trails maintained by the City are not included as an open area. Operator or owner shall mean any person who has control over a dust generating source either by operating, supervising, controlling, or maintaining ownership of the activity or source DRAFT Dust Prevention and Control Manual Do not cite or quote – Legal Review Pending Page 4 exposed and inactive for 30 days or more or while vegetation is being established using mulch, compost, soil mats, or other methods. Stockpile shall mean any accumulation of bulk materials that contain particulate matter being stored for future use or disposal. This includes backfill materials and storage piles for soil, sand, dirt, mulch, aggregate, straw, chaff, or other materials that produce dust. Storm drainage facility shall mean those improvements designed, constructed or used to convey or control stormwater runoff and to remove pollutants from stormwater runoff after precipitation. Surface roughening shall mean to modify the soil surface to resist wind action and reduce dust emissions from wind erosion by creating grooves, depressions, ridges or furrows perpendicular to the predominant wind direction using tilling, ripping, discing, or other method. Synthetic or natural cover shall mean the installation of a temporary cover material on top of disturbed soil surfaces or stockpiles, such as tarps, plastic sheeting, netting, mulch, wood chips, gravel or other materials capable of preventing wind erosion. Track-out shall mean the carrying of mud, dirt, soil, or debris on vehicle wheels, sides, or undercarriages from a private, commercial, or industrial site onto a public road or right-of- way. Vegetation shall mean the planting or seeding of appropriate grasses, plants, bushes, or trees to hold soil or to create a wind break. All seeded areas must be mulched, and the mulch should be adequately crimped and or tackified. If hydro-seeding is conducted, mulching must be conducted as a separate, second operation. All planted areas must be mulched within twenty- four (24) hours after planting. Wet suppression shall mean the application of water by spraying, sprinkling, or misting to maintain optimal moisture content or to form a crust in dust generating materials and applied at a rate that prevents runoff from entering any public right-of-way, storm drainage facility or watercourse. Wind barrier shall mean an obstruction at least five feet high erected to assist in preventing the blowing of fugitive dust, comprised of a solid board fence, chain link and fabric fence, vertical wooden slats, hay bales, earth berm, bushes, trees, or other materials installed perpendicular to the predominant wind direction or upwind of an adjacent residential, commercial, industrial, or sensitive area that would be negatively impacted by DRAFT Dust Prevention and Control Manual Do not cite or quote – Legal Review Pending Page 5 2.0 Fugitive Dust and the Problems it Causes 2.1 What is Fugitive Dust, Generally? Dust, also known as particulate matter, is made up of solid particles in the air that consist primarily of dirt and soil but can also contain ash, soot, salts, pollen, heavy metals, asbestos, pesticides, and other materials. “Fugitive” dust means particulate matter that has become airborne by wind or human activities and has not been emitted from a stack, chimney, or vent. The Colorado Department of Public Health and Environment (CDPHE) estimates that more than 4,300 tons of particulate matter are emitted into the air in Larimer County annually. The primary sources of this particulate matter include construction activities, paved and unpaved roads, and agricultural operations. The quantity of dust emitted from a particular activity or area and the materials in it can depend on the soil type (sand, clay, silt), moisture content (dry or damp), local wind speed, and the current or past uses of the site (industrial, farming, construction). 2.2 Why is the City Addressing Fugitive Dust? Colorado state air regulations and Larimer County air quality standards generally require owners and operators of dust generating activities or sources to use all available and practical methods that are technologically feasible and economically reasonable in order to prevent fugitive dust emissions. However, state regulations and permitting requirements typically apply to larger stationary sources rather than to activities that generate dust. Larimer County fugitive dust standards apply only to land development. Although state and county requirements apply to many construction activities, they do not address many sources of dust emissions and City code compliance officers do not have authority to enforce state or county regulations. Fort Collins is experiencing rapid growth and development that has contributed to local man-made dust emissions. The City has established Article X of Chapter 12 of the Code (§§12- 150-12-159) to address dust generating activities and sources that negatively impact citizens in Fort Collins. DRAFT Dust Prevention and Control Manual Do not cite or quote – Legal Review Pending Page 6 2.3 Health and Environmental Effects Dust particles are very small and can be easily inhaled. They can enter the respiratory system and increase susceptibility to respiratory infections, and aggravate cardio-pulmonary disease. Even short-term exposure to dust can cause wheezing, asthma attacks and allergic reactions, and may cause increases in hospital admissions and emergency department visits for heart and lung related diseases. Fugitive dust emissions can cause significant environmental impacts as well as health effects. When dust from wind erosion or human activity deposits out of the air, it may impact vegetation, adversely affect nearby soils and waterways, and cause damage to cultural resources. Wind erosion can result in the loss of valuable top soil, reduce crop yields, and stunt plant growth. According to the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), studies have linked particulate matter exposure to health problems and environmental impacts such as: •Health Impacts: o Irritation of the airways, coughing, and difficulty breathing o Reduced lung function and lung cancer o Aggravated asthma and chronic bronchitis o Irregular heartbeat and increases in heart attacks •Environmental Impacts: o Haze and reduced visibility o Reduced levels of nutrients in soil 2.4 Nuisance and Aesthetics Dust, dirt and debris that become airborne eventually settle back down to the surface. How far it travels and where it gets deposited depends on the size and type of the particles as well as wind speed and direction. When this material settles, it can be deposited on homes, cars, lawns, pools and ponds, and other property. The small particles can get trapped in machinery and electronics causing abrasion, corrosion, and malfunctions. The deposited dust can damage painted surfaces, clog filtration systems, stain materials and cause other expensive clean-up projects. 2.5 Safety Hazard and Visibility Blowing dust can be a safety hazard at construction sites and on roads and highways. Dust can obstruct visibility and can cause accidents between vehicles and bikes, pedestrians, or site workers. Dust plumes can also decrease visibility across a natural area or scenic vistas. The “brown cloud”, often visible along the Front Range during the winter months, and the brilliant red sunsets that occur are often caused by particulate matter and other pollutants in the air. DRAFT Dust Prevention and Control Manual Do not cite or quote – Legal Review Pending Page 7 3.0 Best Management Practices This Manual describes established best management practices for controlling dust emissions that are practical and used in common practice to prevent or mitigate impacts to air quality from dust generating activities and sources occurring within Fort Collins. The objective of the dust control measures included in this Manual are to reduce dust emissions from human activities and to prevent those emissions from impacting others and are based on the following principles: Prevent – avoid creating dust emissions through good project planning and modifying or replacing dust generating activities. Minimize – reduce dust emissions with methods that capture, collect, or contain emissions. Mitigate – when preventing fugitive dust or minimizing the impacts are not feasible, the Manual provides specific measures to mitigate dust. More specifically, the Manual establishes the following procedures for each dust generating activity outlined in this Chapter: 1. Required Best Management Practices – this section includes the specific measures that are required to be implemented if the dust generating activity is occurring. For example, high wind restrictions (temporarily halting work when wind speeds exceed 30 mph) are required best management practices for earthmoving, demolition/renovation, saw cutting or grind, abrasive blasting, and leaf blowing. 2. Additional Best Management Practices – this section includes additional measures if the required best management practices are ineffective at preventing off-property transport of particulate matter. At least one of the additional best management practices outlined in the Manual must be implemented on the site to be in compliance with the Manual and Code. 3. Additional Requirements – When applicable, additional measures are also required, e.g., a dust control plan when project sites are over 5 acres in size. DRAFT Dust Prevention and Control Manual Do not cite or quote – Legal Review Pending Page 8 3.1 Earthmoving Activities Above: This figure illustrates earthmoving, which is an activity that can generate dust. Dust emissions from earthmoving activities depend on the type and extent of activity being conducted, the amount of exposed surface area, wind conditions, and soil type and moisture content, including: x Site preparation (clearing, grubbing, scraping) x Road construction x Grading and overlot grading x Excavating, trenching, backfilling and compacting x Loading and unloading dirt, soil, gravel, or other earth materials x Dumping of dirt, soil, gravel, or other earth materials into trucks, piles, or receptacles x Screening of dirt, soil, gravel, or other earth materials Best Management Practices to Control Dust (a) Required Best Management Practices: Any person, owner, or operator who conducts earthmoving that is a dust generating activity or source shall implement the following best management practices to prevent off-property transport of fugitive dust emissions: (i) Minimize disturbed area: plan the project or activity so that the minimum amount of disturbed soil or surface area is exposed to wind or vehicle traffic at any one time. (ii) Reduce vehicle speeds: establish a maximum speed limit or install traffic calming devices to reduce speeds to a rate to mitigate off-property transport of dust entrained by vehicles. (iii) Minimize drop height: Drivers and operators shall unload truck beds and loader or excavator buckets slowly, and minimize drop height of materials to the lowest height possible, including screening operations. (iv) High winds restriction: temporarily halt work activities during high wind events greater than 30 mph if operations would result in off-property transport. (v) Restrict access: restrict access to the work area to only authorized vehicles and personnel. DRAFT Dust Prevention and Control Manual Do not cite or quote – Legal Review Pending Page 9 (b) Additional Best Management Practices: In the event 3.1(a)(i)-(v) are ineffective to prevent off- property transport, the person, owner, or operator shall use at least one of the following best management practices: (i) Wet suppression: apply water to disturbed soil surfaces, backfill materials, screenings, and other dust generating operations as necessary and appropriate considering current weather conditions, and prevent water used for dust control from entering any public right-of-way, stormwater drainage facility, or watercourse. (ii) Wind barrier: construct a fence or other type of wind barrier to prevent wind erosion of top soils. (iii) Vegetation: plant vegetation appropriate for retaining soils or creating a wind break. (iv) Surface roughening: stabilize an active construction area during periods of inactivity or when vegetation cannot be immediately established. (v) Synthetic or natural cover: install cover materials during periods of inactivity and properly anchor the cover. (vi) Soil retention: stabilize disturbed or exposed soil surface areas that will be inactive for more than 30 days or while vegetation is being established. (vii) Chemical stabilization: apply chemical stabilizers using manufacturer’s recommended application rates. Avoid over-application and prevent runoff of chemical stabilizers into any public right-of-way, storm drainage facility, or watercourse. Asphalt-based products or any product containing cationic polyacrylamide or products deemed environmentally incompatible with Code §26-498, or defined as a pollutant per Code §26-491, or explicitly prohibited by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency or the state of Colorado may not be used for chemical stabilization. Water soluble plant-based oils or gums, clay additives, or other synthetic polymer emulsion that are non-toxic, non-combustible, and harmless to fish, wildlife, plants, pets, and humans may be used for chemical stabilization. (c) Additional requirements: Any person, owner, or operator who conducts earthmoving that is a dust generating activity or source at a construction site or land development project with a total disturbed surface area equal to or greater than five (5) acres also shall implement the following measures: (i) Dust Control Plan: submit a plan that describes all potential sources of fugitive dust and methods that will be employed to control dust emissions with the development construction permit application or development review application (see Chapter 4 of this Manual). A copy of the Dust Control Plan must be onsite at all times and one copy must be provided to all contractors and operators engaged in dust generating activities at the site. (ii) Construction sequencing: include sequencing or phasing in the project plan to minimize the amount of disturbed area at any one time. Sites with greater than 25 acres of disturbed surface exposed at any one time may be asked to provide additional justification, revise the sequencing plan, or include additional best management practices. DRAFT Dust Prevention and Control Manual Do not cite or quote – Legal Review Pending Page 10 3.2 Demolition and Renovation Above: This photo illustrates restricting access (a mandatory measure) and a wind barrier (an engineering control) for demolition and renovation activities. Dust generated from demolition activities may contain significant levels of silica, lead, asbestos, and particulate matter. Inhalation of silica and asbestos is known to cause lung cancer, and exposure to even small quantities of lead dust can result in harm to children and the unborn. In addition to complying with the dust control measures below, any person engaged in demolition or renovation projects must comply with applicable state and federal regulations for asbestos and lead containing materials and notification and inspection requirements under the State of Colorado Air Quality Control Commission's Regulation No. 8, Part B Control of Hazardous Air pollutants. Best Management Practices to Control Dust (a) Required Best Management Practices: Any person, owner, or operator who conducts demolition or renovation that is a dust generating activity or source shall implement the following best management practices to prevent off-property transport of fugitive dust emissions: (i) Asbestos and lead containing materials: demolition and renovation activities that involve asbestos or lead containing materials must be conducted in accordance with Code Chapter 5 Sec. 5-27 (59) §3602.1.1; (ii) Restrict access: restrict access to the demolition area to only authorized vehicles and personnel; (iii) High winds restriction: temporarily halt work activities during high wind events greater than 30 mph if operations would result in off-property transport; and (iv) Minimize drop height: Drivers and operators shall unload truck beds and loader or excavator buckets slowly, and minimize drop height of materials to the lowest height possible, including screening operations. DRAFT Dust Prevention and Control Manual Do not cite or quote – Legal Review Pending Page 11 (b) Additional Best Management Practices: In the event 3.2(a)(i)-(iv) are ineffective to prevent off- property transport, the person, owner, or operator shall use at least one of the following best management practices: (i) Wet suppression: apply water to demolished materials or pre-wet materials to be demolished as necessary. Prevent water used for dust control from entering any public right-of- way, storm drainage facility, or watercourse. (ii) Chemical stabilization: apply chemical stabilizers to demolished materials or materials to be demolished using manufacturer’s recommended application rates. Avoid over-application and prevent runoff of chemical stabilizers into any public right-of-way, storm drainage facility, or watercourse. Asphalt-based products or any product containing cationic polyacrylamide or products deemed environmentally incompatible with Code §26-498, or defined as a pollutant per Code §26-491, or explicitly prohibited by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency or the state of Colorado may not be used for chemical stabilization. Water soluble plant-based oils or gums, clay additives, or other synthetic polymer emulsion that are non-toxic, non-combustible, and harmless to fish, wildlife, plants, pets, and humans may be used for chemical stabilization. (iii) Wind barrier: construct a fence or other type of wind barrier to prevent onsite dust generating materials from blowing offsite. (c) Additional requirements: (i) Building permit compliance: comply with all conditions and requirements under any building required pursuant to the Code and/or the Land Use Code. Above: This photo illustrates reducing drop height, a required best management practice. DRAFT Dust Prevention and Control Manual Do not cite or quote – Legal Review Pending Page 12 3.3 Stockpiles Above: This photo illustrates wet suppression, an additional best management practice for stockpiles. Stockpiles are used for both temporary and long-term storage of soil, fill dirt, sand, aggregate, woodchips, mulch, asphalt and other industrial feedstock, construction and landscaping materials. Fugitive dust can be emitted from stockpiles while working the active face of the pile or when wind blows across the pile. The quantity of emissions depends on pile height and exposure to wind, moisture content and particle size of the pile material, surface roughness of the pile, and frequency of pile disturbance. Best Management Practices to Control Dust (a) Required Best Management Practices: Any owner or operator of a stockpile that is a dust generating activity or source shall implement the following best management practices to prevent off property transport of fugitive dust emissions: (i) Minimize drop height: Drivers and operators shall unload truck beds and loader or excavator buckets slowly, and minimize drop height of materials to the lowest height possible, including screening operations. (b) Additional Best Management Practices: In the event 3.3(a)(i) is ineffective to prevent off-property transport, the person, owner, or operator shall use at least one of the following best management practices: (i) Wet suppression: Apply water to the active face when working the pile or to the entire pile during periods of inactivity. Prevent water used for dust control from entering any public right- of-way, storm drainage facility, or watercourse. (ii) Synthetic or natural cover: install cover materials during periods of inactivity and anchor the cover. DRAFT Dust Prevention and Control Manual Do not cite or quote – Legal Review Pending Page 13 (iii) Surface roughening: stabilize a stockpile during periods of inactivity or when vegetation cannot be immediately established. (iv) Stockpile location: locate stockpile at a distance equal to ten times the pile height from property boundaries that abut residential areas. (v) Vegetation: seed and mulch any stockpile that will remain inactive for 30 days or more. (vi) Chemical stabilization: apply chemical stabilizers using manufacturer’s recommended application rates. Avoid over-application and prevent runoff of chemical stabilizers into any public right-of-way, storm drainage facility, or watercourse. Asphalt-based products or any product containing cationic polyacrylamide or products deemed environmentally incompatible with Code §26-498, or defined as a pollutant per Code §26-491, or explicitly prohibited by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency or the state of Colorado may not be used for chemical stabilization. Water soluble plant-based oils or gums, clay additives, or other synthetic polymer emulsion that are non-toxic, non-combustible, and harmless to fish, wildlife, plants, pets, and humans may be used for chemical stabilization. (vii) Enclosure: construct a three-sided structure equal to or greater than the height of the pile to shelter the pile from the predominant winds. (c) Additional requirements: (i) Stockpile permit compliance: comply with all conditions and requirements under any stockpile permit required under the Code or the Land Use Code. (ii) Erosion control plan compliance: implement and comply with all conditions and requirements in Section §26-500 “Fort Collins Storm Criteria”; specifically, Volume 3 Chapter 7 “Construction BMPs”. The criteria requirement may require the use of Erosion Control Materials, soil stockpile height limit of ten feet, watering, surface roughening, vegetation, silt fence and other control measures as contained in that chapter. Left: This picture illustrates one of the additional best management practices for stockpiles – to use a synthetic cover. DRAFT Dust Prevention and Control Manual Do not cite or quote – Legal Review Pending Page 14 3.4 Street Sweeping Left: This figure illustrates the use of a wet suppression and vacuum system, an additional best management practice for street sweeping. Street sweeping is an effective method for removing dirt and debris from streets and preventing it from entering storm drains or becoming airborne. Regenerative air sweepers and mechanical sweepers with water spray can also be effective at removing particulate matter from hard surfaces. Best Management Practices to Control Dust (a) Required Best Management Practices: Any owner or operator that conducts sweeping operations or services on paved or concrete roads, parking lots, rights-of-way, pedestrian ways, plazas or other solid surfaces, and whose operations are a dust generating activity or source shall implement the following best management practices to prevent off-property transport of fugitive dust emissions: (i) Uncontrolled sweeping prohibited: the use of rotary brushes, power brooms, or other mechanical sweeping for the removal of dust, dirt, mud, or other debris from a paved public road, right-of-way, or parking lot without the use of water, vacuum system with filtration, or other equivalent dust control method is prohibited. Mechanical or manual sweeping that occurs between lifts of asphalt paving operations or due to preparation for pavement markings are excluded from this prohibition, due to engineering requirements associated with these operations. (b) Additional Best Management Practices: In the event 3.4(a)(i) is ineffective to prevent off-property transport, the person, owner, or operator shall use at least one of the following best management practices: (i) Wet suppression: use a light spray of water or wetting agent applied directly to work area or use equipment with water spray system while operating sweeper or power broom. Prevent water used for dust control from entering any storm drainage facility or watercourse. (ii) Vacuum system: use sweeper or power broom equipped with a vacuum collection and filtration system. (iii) Other method: use any other method to control dust emissions that has a demonstrated particulate matter control efficiency of 80 percent or more. DRAFT Dust Prevention and Control Manual Do not cite or quote – Legal Review Pending Page 15 3.5 Track-out / Carry-out Above: This figure illustrates an installed grate (left) and a gravel bed (right), both of which are additional best management practices associated with track-out/carry-out. Mud, dirt, and other debris can be carried from a site on equipment’s wheels or undercarriage onto public roads. When this material dries, it can become airborne by wind activity or when other vehicles travel on it. This is a health concern and can cause visibility issues and safety hazards. Best Management Practices to Control Dust (a) Required Best Management Practices: Any owner or operator of any operation that has the potential to result in track-out of dirt, dust, or debris on public roads and rights-of-way and whose operation is a dust generating activity or source shall implement the following best management practices to prevent off-property transport of fugitive dust emissions: (i) Contracts and standards: comply with track-out prevention requirements and construction best management practices as set forth in the Code, City regulations, or policies and as specified in applicable contract documents or Fort Collins Stormwater Criteria Manual. (ii) Remove deposition: promptly remove any deposition that occurs on public roads or rights- of-way as a result of the owner’s or operator’s operations. Avoid over-watering and prevent runoff into any storm drainage facility or watercourse. (b) Additional Best Management Practices: In the event 3.5(a)(i)-(ii) are ineffective to prevent off- property transport, the person, owner, or operator shall use at least one of the following best management practices: (i) Install rails, pipes, grate, or similar track-out control device. (ii) Install a gravel bed track-out apron that extends at least 50 feet from the intersection with a public road or right-of-way. (iii) Install gravel bed track-out apron with steel cattle guard or concrete wash rack. (iv) Install and utilize on-site vehicle and equipment washing station. (v) Install a paved surface that extends at least 100 feet from the intersection with a public road or right-of-way. (vi) Manually remove mud, dirt, and debris from equipment and vehicle wheels, tires and undercarriage. DRAFT Dust Prevention and Control Manual Do not cite or quote – Legal Review Pending Page 16 3.6 Bulk Materials Transport Above: This figure illustrates covered loads, a required best management practice for bulk materials transport. Haul trucks are used to move bulk materials, such as dirt, rock, demolition debris, or mulch to and from construction sites, material suppliers and storage yards. Dust emissions from haul trucks, if uncontrolled, can be a safety hazard by impairing visibility or by depositing debris on roads, pedestrians, bicyclists, or other vehicles. Best Management Practices to Control Dust (a) Required Best Management Practices: Any owner or operator of a dust generating activity or source for which vehicles used for transporting bulk materials to and from a site within the City on a public or private road or on a public right-of-way shall prevent off-vehicle transport of fugitive dust emissions. To prevent off-vehicle transport of fugitive dust to and from the site, the owner or operator shall implement the following measures: (i) Cover Loads: Loads shall be completely covered or all material enclosed in a manner that prevents the material from blowing, dropping, sifting, leaking, or otherwise escaping from the vehicle. This includes the covering of hot asphalt and asphalt patching material with a tarp or other impermeable material. (ii) Minimize drop height: Drivers and operators shall unload truck beds and loader or excavator buckets slowly, and minimize drop height of materials to the lowest height possible, including screening operations. DRAFT Dust Prevention and Control Manual Do not cite or quote – Legal Review Pending Page 17 (b) Additional Best Management Practices: In the event 3.6(a)(i)-(ii) are ineffective to prevent off- vehicle transport, the person, owner, or operator shall use at least one of the following best management practices: (i) Wet suppression: apply water to bulk materials loaded for transport as necessary to prevent fugitive dust emissions and deposition of materials on roadways. Prevent water used for dust control from entering any public right-of-way, storm drainage facility, or watercourse. (ii) Chemical stabilization: apply chemical stabilizers using manufacturer’s recommended application rates. Avoid over-application and prevent runoff of chemical stabilizers into any public right-of-way, storm drainage facility, or watercourse. Asphalt-based products or any product containing cationic polyacrylamide or products deemed environmentally incompatible with Code §26-498, or defined as a pollutant per Code §26-491, or explicitly prohibited by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency or the state of Colorado may not be used for chemical stabilization. Water soluble plant-based oils or gums, clay additives, or other synthetic polymer emulsion that are non-toxic, non-combustible, and harmless to fish, wildlife, plants, pets, and humans may be used for chemical stabilization. (iii) Other technology: use other equivalent technology that effectively eliminates off-vehicle transport, such as limiting the load size to provide at least three inches of freeboard to prevent spillage. Above: This figure illustrates minimizing drop heights, a required best management practice for bulk materials transport. DRAFT Dust Prevention and Control Manual Do not cite or quote – Legal Review Pending Page 18 3.7 Unpaved Roads and Haul Roads Above: This figure illustrates surface improvements on an unpaved road, an additional best management practice. Road dust from unpaved roads is caused by particles lifted by and dropped from rolling wheels traveling on the road surface and from wind blowing across the road surface. Road dust can aggravate heart and lung conditions as well as cause safety issues such as decreased driver visibility and other safety hazards. Best Management Practices to Control Dust (a) Required Best Management Practices: Any owner or operator of an unpaved road located on a construction site greater than five acres on private property or an unpaved road used as a public right- of-way shall implement the following best management practices to prevent off-property transport of fugitive dust emissions: (i) Reduce vehicle speeds: establish a maximum speed limit or install traffic calming devices to reduce speeds to a rate that prevents off-property transport of dust entrained by vehicles. (ii) Restrict access: restrict travel on unpaved roads by limiting access to only authorized vehicle use. (b) Additional Best Management Practices: In the event 3.7(a)(i)-(ii) are ineffective to prevent off- property transport, the person, owner, or operator shall use at least one of the following best management practices: (i) Wet suppression: apply water to unpaved road surface as necessary and appropriate considering current weather conditions, and prevent water used for dust control from entering any public right-of-way, storm drainage facility, or watercourse. (ii) Surface improvements: install gravel or similar materials with sufficient depth to reduce dust or pave high traffic areas. DRAFT Dust Prevention and Control Manual Do not cite or quote – Legal Review Pending Page 19 (iii) Chemical stabilization: apply chemical stabilizers appropriate for high traffic areas using manufacturer’s recommended application rates. Avoid over-application and prevent runoff of chemical stabilizers into any public right-of-way, storm drainage facility, or watercourse. Asphalt-based products or any product containing cationic polyacrylamide or products deemed environmentally incompatible with Code §26-498, or defined as a pollutant per Code §26-491, or explicitly prohibited by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency or the state of Colorado may not be used for chemical stabilization. Water soluble plant-based oils or gums, clay additives, or other synthetic polymer emulsion that are non-toxic, non-combustible, and harmless to fish, wildlife, plants, pets, and humans may be used for chemical stabilization. (iv) Access road location: locate site access roads away from residential or other populated areas. Above: This figure illustrates wet suppression, an additional best management practice for unpaved and haul roads. DRAFT Dust Prevention and Control Manual Do not cite or quote – Legal Review Pending Page 20 3.8 Parking Lots Above: This figure illustrates an unpaved parking lot in Fort Collins. This section applies to paved and unpaved areas where vehicles are parked or stored on a routine basis and includes parking areas for shopping, recreation, or events; automobile or vehicle storage yards; and animal staging areas. Best Management Practices to Control Dust- Unpaved Parking Lots (a) Required Best Management Practices: Any owners or operator of an unpaved parking lot greater than one-half acre shall use at least one of the following best management practices to prevent off- property transport of fugitive dust emissions (i) Surface improvements: install gravel or similar materials with sufficient depth to reduce dust or pave high traffic areas. (ii) Vegetation: plant vegetation appropriate for retaining soils or creating a wind break. (iii) Wet suppression: apply water as necessary and appropriate considering current weather conditions to prevent off-property transport of fugitive dust emissions. Prevent water used for dust control from entering any public right-of-way, storm drainage facility, or watercourse. (iv) Chemical stabilization: apply chemical stabilizers appropriate for high traffic areas using manufacturer’s recommended application rates. Avoid over-application and prevent runoff of chemical stabilizers into any public right-of-way, storm drainage facility, or watercourse. Asphalt-based products or any product containing cationic polyacrylamide or products deemed environmentally incompatible with Code §26-498, or defined as a pollutant per Code §26-491, or explicitly prohibited by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency or the state of Colorado may not be used for chemical stabilization. Water soluble plant-based oils or gums, clay additives, or other synthetic polymer emulsion that are non-toxic, non-combustible, and harmless to fish, wildlife, plants, pets, and humans may be used for chemical stabilization. (v) Wind barrier: construct a fence or other type of wind barrier. DRAFT Dust Prevention and Control Manual Do not cite or quote – Legal Review Pending Page 21 (vi) Reduce vehicle speeds: establish a maximum speed limit or install traffic calming devices to reduce speeds to a rate that prevents off-property transport of dust entrained by vehicles. (vii) Restrict access: restrict travel in parking lots to only those vehicles with essential duties and limit access to hours of operation or specific events. Best Management Practices to Control Dust- Paved Parking Lots (a) Required Best Management Practices: An owner or operator of a paved parking lot greater than one-half acre and shall use at least one of the following best management practices to prevent off- property transport of fugitive dust emissions. (i) Maintenance: repair potholes and cracks and maintain surface improvements. (ii) Mechanical sweeping: Sweep lot with a vacuum sweeper and light water spray as necessary to remove dirt and debris. Avoid overwatering and prevent runoff from entering any public right-of-way, storm drainage facility, or watercourse. (iii) Reduce vehicle speeds: establish a maximum speed limit or install traffic calming devices to reduce speeds to a rate that prevents off-property transport of dust entrained by vehicles. (iv) Restrict access: restrict travel in parking lots to only those vehicles with essential duties and limit access to hours of operation or specific events. Above: This photo represents improving the surface of a parking area, which is one measure to comply with the Manual. DRAFT Dust Prevention and Control Manual Do not cite or quote – Legal Review Pending Page 22 3.9 Open Areas and Vacant Lots Above: These photos illustrate open areas in Fort Collins, which have the potential to generate dust. Open areas are typically not a significant source of wind-blown dust emissions if the coverage of vegetation is sufficient or soil crusts are intact. However, if soils in open areas are disturbed by vehicle traffic, off-highway vehicle use, bicycling or grazing, or if they have become overpopulated by prairie dogs, dust emissions can become a problem. Best Management Practices to Control Dust (a) Required Best Management Practices: Any owner or operator of an open area greater than one-half acre shall use at least one of the following best management practices to stabilize disturbed or exposed soil surface areas that are intended to or remain exposed for 30 days or more and to prevent off- property transport of fugitive dust emissions: (i) Vegetation: plant vegetation appropriate for retaining soils or creating a wind break. (ii) Synthetic or natural cover: install cover materials over exposed areas during periods of inactivity and properly anchor the cover. (iii) Surface roughening: stabilize an exposed area during periods of inactivity or when vegetation cannot be immediately established. (iv) Soil retention: stabilize disturbed or exposed soil surface areas that will be inactive for more than 30 days or while vegetation is being established, using mulch, compost, soil mats, or other methods. (v) Wet suppression: apply water to disturbed soil surfaces as necessary and appropriate considering current weather to prevent off-property transport of fugitive dust emissions. Prevent water used for dust control from entering any public right-of-way, storm drainage facility, or watercourse. (vi) Wind barrier: construct a fence or other type of wind barrier to prevent wind erosion of top soils. DRAFT Dust Prevention and Control Manual Do not cite or quote – Legal Review Pending Page 23 (vii) Chemical stabilization: apply chemical stabilizers using manufacturer’s recommended application rates. Avoid over-application and prevent runoff of chemical stabilizers into any public right-of-way, storm drainage facility, or watercourse. Asphalt-based products or any product containing cationic polyacrylamide or products deemed environmentally incompatible with Code §26-498, or defined as a pollutant per Code §26-491, or explicitly prohibited by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency or the state of Colorado may not be used for chemical stabilization. Water soluble plant-based oils or gums, clay additives, or other synthetic polymer emulsion that are non-toxic, non-combustible, and harmless to fish, wildlife, plants, pets, and humans may be used for chemical stabilization. Above: This photo represents adding vegetation by hydroseeding, which is one measure to comply with the Manual. DRAFT Dust Prevention and Control Manual Do not cite or quote – Legal Review Pending Page 24 3.10 Saw Cutting and Grinding Above: This photo illustrates concrete cutting and how the activity can generate dust. Cutting and grinding of asphalt, concrete and other masonry materials can be a significant short-term source of fugitive dust that may expose workers and the public to crystalline silica. Inhalation of silica can cause lung disease known as silicosis and has been linked to other diseases such as tuberculosis and lung cancer. Using additional best management practices during cutting and grinding operations can significantly reduce dust emissions. Best Management Practices to Control Dust (a) Required Best Management Practices: Any person, owner, or operator that cuts or grinds asphalt, concrete, brick, tile, stone, or other masonry materials and whose operations are a dust generating activity or source shall use the following best management practices to prevent off-property transport of fugitive dust emissions: (i) Restrict access: prevent the public from entering the area where dust emissions occur. (ii) High winds restriction: temporarily halt work activities during high wind events greater than 30 mph if operations would result in off-property transport. (iii) Equipment and work area clean up: use wet wiping, wet sweeping, or vacuuming with HEPA filtration for equipment and work area clean up and do not cause dust to become airborne during clean up. (iv) Slurry clean up: prevent water used for dust control or clean up from entering any public right-of-way, storm drainage facility, or watercourse by using containment, vacuuming, absorption, or other method to remove the slurry, and dispose of slurry and containment materials properly. Follow additional procedures prescribed in the City’s Fort Collins Stormwater Criteria Manual or contract documents and specifications. DRAFT Dust Prevention and Control Manual Do not cite or quote – Legal Review Pending Page 25 (b) Additional Best Management Practices: In the event 3.10(a)(i)-(iv) are ineffective to prevent off- property transport, the person, owner, or operator shall use at least one of the following best management practices: (i) On-tool local exhaust ventilation: use a tool-mounted dust capture and collection system. (ii) On-tool wet suppression: use a tool-mounted water application system. (iii) Vacuuming: use a vacuum equipped with a HEPA filter simultaneously with cutting or grinding operations. (iv) Wet suppression: use a water sprayer or hose simultaneously with cutting or grinding operations. (v) Enclosure: conduct cutting or grinding within an enclosure with a dust collection system or temporary tenting over the work area. Above: These photos illustrate how dust generated from cutting can be minimized by applying on-tool wet suppression, an additional best management practice associated with saw cutting and grinding. DRAFT Dust Prevention and Control Manual Do not cite or quote – Legal Review Pending Page 26 3.11 Abrasive Blasting Above: This photo illustrates abrasive blasting without dust mitigation in place. Abrasive blasting is used to smooth rough surfaces; roughen smooth surfaces; and remove paint, dirt, grease, and other coatings from surfaces. Abrasive blasting media may consist of sand; glass, plastic or metal beads; aluminum oxide; corn cobs; or other materials. Abrasive blasting typically generates a significant amount of fugitive dust if not controlled. The material removed during abrasive blasting can become airborne and may contain silica, lead, cadmium or other byproducts removed from the surface being blasted.* Best Management Practices to Control Dust (a) Required Best Management Practices: Any person, owner, or operator who conducts outdoor abrasive blasting or indoor abrasive blasting with uncontrolled emissions vented to the outside and whose operations are a dust generating activity or source shall implement the following best management practices to prevent off-property transport of fugitive dust emissions: (i) Restrict access: prevent the public from entering the area where dust emissions occur. (ii) High winds restriction: temporarily halt work activities during high wind events greater than 30 mph if operations would result in off-property transport. (iii) Equipment and work area clean up: use wet wiping, wet sweeping, or vacuuming with HEPA filtration for equipment and work area clean up and do not cause dust to become airborne during clean up. (iv) Slurry clean up: prevent water used for dust control or clean up from entering any public right-of-way, storm drainage facility, or watercourse by using containment, vacuuming, absorption, or other method to remove the slurry, and dispose of slurry and containment materials properly. DRAFT Dust Prevention and Control Manual Do not cite or quote – Legal Review Pending Page 27 (b) Additional Best Management Practices: In the event 3.11(a)(i)-(iv) are ineffective to prevent off- property transport, the person, owner, or operator shall use at least one of the following best management practices: (i) Enclosure: conduct abrasive blasting within an enclosure with a dust collection system or temporary tenting over the work area. (ii) Wet suppression blasting: use one of several available methods that mix water with the abrasive media or air during blasting operations. (iii) Vacuum blasting: conduct air-based blasting that uses a nozzle attachment with negative air pressure to capture dust. (iv) Abrasive media: select less toxic, lower dust-generating blasting media. * Blasting on surfaces that contain lead paint or wastes from sand blasting that contain hazardous materials may be subject to additional state and federal requirements. Above: This photo illustrates wet suppression blasting, an additional best management practice. DRAFT Dust Prevention and Control Manual Do not cite or quote – Legal Review Pending Page 28 3.12 Mechanical Blowing Above: This photo illustrates mechanical blowing without dust mitigation in place. Mechanical blowers are commonly used to move dirt, sand, leaves, grass clippings and other landscaping debris to a central location for easier pick-up and removal. Mechanical blowing with a leaf blower can be a significant source of fugitive dust in some situations and can create nuisance conditions and cause health effects for sensitive individuals. Mechanical blowing can resuspend dust particles that contain allergens, pollens, and molds, as well as pesticides, fecal contaminants, and toxic metals causing allergic reactions, asthma attacks and exacerbating other respiratory illnesses. Best Management Practices to Control Dust (a) Required Best Management Practices: Any person, owner, or operator who operates a mechanical leaf blower (gas, electric, or battery-powered) in a manner that is a dust generating activity or source shall use the following best management practices as necessary to prevent off-property transport of fugitive dust emissions (i) Low speed: use the lowest speed appropriate for the task and equipment. (ii) Operation: use the full length of the blow tube and place the nozzle as close to the ground as possible. (iii) High winds restriction: temporarily halt work activities during high wind events greater than 30 mph if operations would result in off-property transport. (b) Additional Best Management Practices: In the event 3.11(a)(i)-(iii) are ineffective to prevent off- property transport, the person, owner, or operator shall use at least one of the following best management practices: (i) Alternative method: use an alternative such as a rake, broom, shovel, manually push sweeper or a vacuum machine equipped with a filtration system. (ii) Prevent impact: do not blow dust and debris off-property or in close proximity to people, animals, open windows, air intakes, or onto adjacent property, public right-of-way, storm drainage facility, or watercourse. DRAFT Dust Prevention and Control Manual Do not cite or quote – Legal Review Pending Page 29 (iii) Minimize use on dirt: minimize the use of mechanical blower on unpaved surfaces, road shoulders, or loose dirt. (iv) Wet suppression: use a light spray of water, as necessary and appropriate considering current weather conditions, to dampen dusty work areas. Prevent water, dirt, and debris from entering any storm drainage facility, or watercourse. (v) Remove debris: remove and properly dispose of blown material immediately. Above: These photos illustrate alternative methods to mechanical blowing that can minimize dust generation. DRAFT Dust Prevention and Control Manual Do not cite or quote – Legal Review Pending Page 30 4.0 Dust Control Plan for Land Development Greater Than Five Acres A dust control plan is required for all development projects or construction sites with a total disturbed surface area equal to or greater than five (5) acres. If the project is required to obtain a development construction permit, then the dust control plan shall be submitted with the development review application or the development construction permit application. A copy of the dust control plan shall be available onsite at all times for compliance and inspection purposes. For dust control plans associated with a Development Construction Permit (DCP), applications for the DCP are available online at www.fcgov.com/developmentreview/applications.php. The dust control plan may be submitted on the Dust Control Plan Form included in Chapter 4 of this Manual or other equivalent format and shall include the following information: x Project name and location. x Name and contact information of property owner. x Project start and completion dates. x Name and contact information of the developer, general contractor, and each contractor or operator that will be engaged in an earthmoving activity. x Total size of the development project or construction site in acres. x A description of the project phasing or sequencing of the project to minimize the amount of disturbed surface area at any one time during the project. x A list of each dust generating activity or source associated with the project. x A list of each best management practice and engineering control that will be implemented for each dust generating activity or source. x A list of additional best management practices that will be implemented if initial controls are ineffective. x A signed statement from the property owner, developer, general contractor, and each contractor or operator engaged in an earthmoving activity acknowledging receipt of the Dust Control Plan and an understanding of and ability to comply with the best management practices in the plan. DRAFT Dust Prevention and Control Manual Do not cite or quote – Legal Review Pending Page 31 DUST CONTROL PLAN PROJECT INFORMATION Project Name Project Location Start and Completion Dates Total Size of Project Site (acres) Maximum disturbed surface area at any one time (acres) Property Owner name, address, phone, e-mail Developer name, address, phone, e-mail General Contractor name, address, phone, e-mail Subcontractor or Operator of a dust generating activity or source name, address, phone, e-mail Subcontractor or Operator of a dust generating activity or source name, address, phone, e-mail Subcontractor or Operator of a dust generating activity or source name, address, phone, e-mail PROJECT PHASING OR SEQUENCING Provide a description of how this project will be phased or sequenced to minimize the disturbed surface area. Attach phasing plan or map if available. DRAFT Dust Prevention and Control Manual Do not cite or quote – Legal Review Pending Page 32 DUST CONTROL PLAN CERTIFICATION I certify the information and attachments contained in this Dust Control Plan are true and correct to the best of my knowledge and that I and the project's subcontractors have received a copy of this Dust Control Plan and acknowledge my understanding of and ability to comply with best management practices for controlling fugitive dust emissions. I hereby permit City officials to enter upon the property for the purpose of inspection of any dust generating activity or source for which I am the responsible person, owner, or operator. Name: ________________________________________________________________________________ Title: ___________________________________ Role on project: ________________________________ Address: ________________________________________________ Phone: __________________________ Signature: ___________________________________________________ Date: ____________________ * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * List of Subcontractors: Title: ___________________________________ Role on project: ________________________________ Title: ____________________________________ Role on project: ________________________________ Title: ___________________________________ Role on project: ________________________________ Title: ____________________________________Role on project: ________________________________ Title: ____________________________________Role on project: ________________________________ Title: ___________________________________ Role on project: ________________________________ Title: ___________________________________ Role on project: ________________________________ Title: ___________________________________ Role on project: ________________________________ DRAFT Dust Prevention and Control Manual Do not cite or quote – Legal Review Pending Page 33 Instructions: Place an X in each box indicating all best management practices that will be implemented for each dust generating activity. Please refer to the Dust Prevention and Control Manual for requirements. Dust Generating Activity Ö /Best Management Practice Ø Earthmoving Demolition/ Renovation Stockpile Street Sweeping Track-out /Carry- out Bulk Materials Transport Unpaved Roads and Haul Roads Parking Lot Open Area Saw Cutting or Grinding Abrasive Blasting Leaf Blowing . Abrasive media Asbestos or lead materials Building permit Chemical stabilization Construction sequencing Drop height Enclosure Equipment &work area clean up Erosion Control plan High winds restriction Load cover Leaf blowing techniques Location Minimize disturbed area On-tool local exhaust ventilation On-tool wet suppression Other method Reduce vehicle speeds Remove deposition Restrict access Slurry clean up Soil retention Stockpile permit Surface improvements Surface roughening Sweeping Synthetic or natural cover Track-out prevention system Uncontrolled sweeping prohibited Vacuum Vegetation Wet suppression Wind barrier Describe any additional dust generating activities and best management practices that will be used: DRAFT Dust Prevention and Control Manual Do not cite or quote – Legal Review Pending Page 34 5.0 Resources 5.1 Cross Reference to Codes, Standards, Regulations, and Policies Earthmoving Activities Fort Collins Land Use Code Article 3 General Development Standards §3.2.2 Access, Circulation and Parking. Fort Collins Land Use Code Article 3 General Development Standards §3.4.1(N) Standards for Protection During Construction. Fort Collins Land Use Code Article 3 General Development Standards §3.4.2 Air Quality. Fort Collins City Code, Chapter 5 Buildings and Building Regulations, Section 5-27 (59) §3602.1.1 Building demolitions. Fort Collins City Code Chapter 20 Nuisances, Article 1 In General, §20-1 Air pollution nuisances prohibited. Fort Collins City Code Chapter 23 Public Property §23-16. Permit required; exception in case of emergency. Fort Collins City Code Chapter 26 Utilities, Article VII Stormwater Utility, §26-498 Water quality control. Fort Collins Stormwater Criteria Manual, Volume 3, Chapter 7, Section 1.3 Policy, Standards and Submittal Requirements, §1.3.3.e.5. Fort Collins Stormwater Criteria Manual – Fact Sheet SM-1 Construction Phasing/Sequencing and Fact Sheet EC-1 Surface Roughening. Larimer County Land Use Code §8.11.4. Fugitive dust during construction. State of Colorado, Air Quality Control Commission, 5 CCR 1001-3, Regulation No. 1, §III.D.2.b Construction Activities. OSHA Safety and Health Regulations for Construction 29 CFR Part 1926.55 Gases, vapors, fumes, dusts, and mists. Demolition and Renovation Fort Collins Land Use Code, Division 2.7 Building Permits §2.7.1 Fort Collins City Code, Chapter 5 Buildings and Building Regulations, Section 5-27 (59) §3602.1.1 Building demolitions. DRAFT Dust Prevention and Control Manual Do not cite or quote – Legal Review Pending Page 35 Fort Collins City Code Chapter 20 Nuisances, Article 1 In General, §20-1 Air pollution nuisances prohibited. Fort Collins City Code Chapter 26 Utilities, Article VII Stormwater Utility, §26-498 Water quality control. State of Colorado, Air Quality Control Commission, Regulation Number 8, Part B Control of Hazardous Air Pollutants, 5 CCR 1001-10. Stockpiles Fort Collins Land Use Code, Division 2.6 Stockpiling Permits and Development Construction Permits §2.6.2. Fort Collins Land Use Code §2.6.3 (K) Stockpiling Permit and Development Construction Permit Review Procedures. Fort Collins City Code Chapter 20 Nuisances, Article 1 In General, §20-1 Air pollution nuisances prohibited. Fort Collins City Code Chapter 26 Utilities, Article VII Stormwater Utility, §26-498 Water quality control. Fort Collins Stormwater Criteria Manual Volume 3, Chapter 7, Section 1.3 Policy, Standards and Submittal Requirements, §1.3.3.e.7. Fort Collins Stormwater Criteria Manual - Fact Sheet MM-2 Stockpile Management. State of Colorado, Air Quality Control Commission, 5 CCR 1001-3, Regulation No. 1, §III.D.2.c Storage and Handling of Materials. Street Sweeping Fort Collins City Code Chapter 20 Nuisances, Article 1 In General, §20-1 Air pollution nuisances prohibited. Fort Collins City Code Chapter 26 Utilities, Article VII Stormwater Utility, §26-498 Water quality control. Fort Collins Stormwater Criteria Manual - Fact Sheet SM-7 Street Sweeping and Vacuuming. Track-out/Carry-out Fort Collins Traffic Code, Part 1407 Spilling loads on highways prohibited. Fort Collins Land Use Code §5.2.1 Definitions Maintenance (of a newly constructed street). Fort Collins City Code: Chapter 20 – Nuisances, Article V - Dirt, Debris and Construction Waste, §Sec. 20-62. Depositing on streets prohibited. Fort Collins City Code Chapter 26 Utilities, Article VII Stormwater Utility, §26-498 Water quality control. DRAFT Dust Prevention and Control Manual Do not cite or quote – Legal Review Pending Page 36 Fort Collins Stormwater Criteria Manual, Volume 3, Chapter 7, Section 1.3 Policy, Standards and Submittal Requirements, §1.3.3.e.8. Fort Collins Stormwater Criteria Manual – Fact Sheet SM-4 Vehicle Tracking Control. Fort Collins Stormwater Criteria Manual – Fact Sheet SM-7 Street Sweeping and Vacuuming. State of Colorado, Air Quality Control Commission, 5 CCR 1001-3, Regulation No. 1, §III.D.2.a.(ii).(B) General Requirements. Bulk Materials Transport Fort Collins Traffic Code, Part 1407 Spilling loads on highways prohibited. Fort Collins City Code Chapter 20 Nuisances, Article 1 In General, §20-1 Air pollution nuisances prohibited. Fort Collins City Code Chapter 26 Utilities, Article VII Stormwater Utility, §26-498 Water quality control. State of Colorado, Air Quality Control Commission, 5 CCR 1001-3, Regulation No. 1, §III.D.2.f Haul Trucks. Colorado Revised Statutes. 42-4-1407 Spilling loads on highways prohibited. Unpaved Roads and Haul Roads Fort Collins City Code Chapter 20 Nuisances, Article 1 In General, §20-1 Air pollution nuisances prohibited. Fort Collins City Code Chapter 26 Utilities, Article VII Stormwater Utility, §26-498 Water quality control. State of Colorado, Air Quality Control Commission, 5 CCR 1001-3, Regulation No. 1, §III.D.2.a Roadways and §III.D.2.e Haul Roads. Parking Lots Fort Collins City Code Chapter 20 Nuisances, Article 1 In General, §20-1 Air pollution nuisances prohibited. Fort Collins City Code Chapter 26 Utilities, Article VII Stormwater Utility, §26-498 Water quality control. Open Areas and Vacant Lots Fort Collins City Code Chapter 20 Nuisances, Article 1 In General, §20-1 Air pollution nuisances prohibited. Fort Collins City Code Chapter 26 Utilities, Article VII Stormwater Utility, §26-498 Water quality control. Saw Cutting and Grinding Fort Collins City Code Chapter 20 Nuisances, Article 1 In General, §20-1 Air pollution nuisances prohibited. DRAFT Dust Prevention and Control Manual Do not cite or quote – Legal Review Pending Page 37 Fort Collins City Code Chapter 26 Utilities, Article VII Stormwater Utility, §26-498 Water quality control. Fort Collins Stormwater Criteria Manual – Fact Sheet SM-12 Paving and Grinding Operations. Colorado Department of Transportation Standard Specifications for Road and Bridge Construction, Section 208.04 Best Management Practices for Stormwater. Abrasive Blasting Fort Collins City Code Chapter 20 Nuisances, Article 1 In General, §20-1 Air pollution nuisances prohibited. Fort Collins City Code Chapter 26 Utilities, Article VII Stormwater Utility, §26-498 Water quality control. Mechanical (Leaf) Blowing Fort Collins City Code Chapter 20 Nuisances, Article 1 In General, §20-1 Air pollution nuisances prohibited. Fort Collins City Code Chapter 26 Utilities, Article VII Stormwater Utility, §26-498 Water quality control. 5.2 City of Fort Collins Manuals and Policies Fort Collins Stormwater Criteria Manual http://www.fcgov.com/utilities/business/builders-and- developers/development-forms-guidelines-regulations/stormwater-criteria City of Fort Collins Parks and Recreation Environmental Best Management Practices Manual 2011, Chapter Four: Best Management Practices for Construction http://www.fcgov.com/parks/pdf/bmp.pdf City of Fort Collins Building Design and Construction Standards, Oct. 2013 http://www.fcgov.com/opserv/pdf/building-design-standards2.pdf?1390850442 City of Fort Collins, Recommended Species and Application Rates of Perennial Native Upland Grass Seed for Fort Collins, Colorado. City of Fort Collins Plant List, April 2011. 5.3 References for Dust Control Leaf Blowing A Report to the California Legislature on the Potential Health and Environmental Impacts of Leaf Blowers, California Environmental Protection Agency – Air Resources Board, Feb. 2000. http://www.arb.ca.gov/msprog/mailouts/msc0005/msc0005.pdf Abrasive Blasting Sandblasting and Other Air-based Blasting Fact Sheet, Minnesota Pollution Control Agency, Dec. 2011. Protecting Workers from the Hazards of Abrasive Blasting Materials, OSHA Fact Sheet. DRAFT Dust Prevention and Control Manual Do not cite or quote – Legal Review Pending Page 38 California Air Resources Board, Abrasive Blasting Program. http://www.arb.ca.gov/ba/certabr/certabr.htm Saw Cutting OSHA Fact Sheet on Crystalline Silica Exposure https://www.osha.gov/OshDoc/data_General_Facts/crystalline-factsheet.pdf State of New Jersey – Dry Cutting and Grinding Fact Sheet http://www.state.nj.us/health/surv/documents/dry_cutting.pdf Centers for Disease Control and Prevention - Engineering Controls for Silica in Construction http://www.cdc.gov/niosh/topics/silica/cutoffsaws.html Shepherd-S; Woskie-S, Controlling Dust from Concrete Saw Cutting. Journal of Occupational and Environmental Hygiene, 2013 Feb; 10(2):64-70. http://www.cdc.gov/niosh/nioshtic-2/20042808.html Akbar-Khanzadeh F, Milz SA, Wagner CD, Bisesi MS, Ames AL, Khuder S, Susi P, Akbar-Khanzadeh M, Effectiveness of dust control methods for crystalline silica and respirable suspended particulate matter exposure during manual concrete surface grinding. Journal of Occupational and Environmental Hygiene, 2010 Dec;7(12):700-11. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21058155 HSE, On-Tool Controls to Reduce Exposure to Respirable Dusts in the Construction Industry – A Review. Health and Safety Executive, RR926, 2012, Derbyshire, U.K. http://www.hse.gov.uk/research/rrpdf/rr926.pdf Croteau G, Guffey S, Flanagan ME, Seixas N, The Effect of Local Exhaust Ventilation Controls on Dust Exposures During Concrete Cutting and Grinding Activities. American Industrial Hygiene Association Journal, 2002 63:458–467 http://deohs.washington.edu/sites/default/files/images/general/CroteauThesis.pdf Unpaved Roads, Parking Lots, and Open Areas Dust Control from Unpaved Roads and Surfaces, Code 373, USDA-NRCS, April 2010. http://www.nrcs.usda.gov/Internet/FSE_DOCUMENTS/nrcs143_025946.pdf CPWA, 2005, Dust Control for Unpaved Roads, A Best Practice by the National Guide to Sustainable Municipal Infrastructure, Canadian Public Works Association. Colorado Forest Road Field Handbook, Colorado State Forest, Editor: Richard M. Edwards, CF; CSFS Assistant Staff Forester, July 2011. Fay L., Kociolek A., Road Dust Management and Future Needs: 2008 Conference Proceedings, Western Transportation Institute, March 2009. Chemical Stabilizers Interim Guidelines on Dust Palliative Use in Clark County, Nevada. Nevada Division of Environmental Protection, Feb. 2001. http://ndep.nv.gov/admin/dustpa1.pdf DRAFT Dust Prevention and Control Manual Do not cite or quote – Legal Review Pending Page 39 Bolander, Peter, ed. 1999. Dust Palliative Selection and Application Guide. Project Report. 9977-1207- SDTDC. San Dimas, CA: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, San Dimas Technology and Development Center. http://www.fs.fed.us/eng/pubs/html/99771207/99771207.html Techniques for Fugitive Dust Control – Chemical Suppressants, City of Albuquerque NM, website last accessed on Oct. 25, 2014. http://www.cabq.gov/airquality/business-programs-permits/ordinances/fugitive-dust/fugitive-dust- control USDA BioPreferred Catalog: Dust Suppressants http://www.biopreferred.gov/BioPreferred/faces/catalog/Catalog.xhtml USGS Columbia Environmental Research Center Project: Environmental Effects of Dust Suppressant Chemicals on Roadside Plant and Animal Communities, http://www.cerc.usgs.gov/Projects.aspx?ProjectId=77 Street Sweeping U.S. Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Stormwater Best Management Practices: Street Sweeper Fact Sheet. http://environment.fhwa.dot.gov/ecosystems/ultraurb/3fs16.asp Agriculture and Livestock Agricultural Air Quality Conservation Measures - Reference Guide for Cropping Systems and General Land Management, USDA-NRCS, Oct. 2012. http://www.nrcs.usda.gov/Internet/FSE_DOCUMENTS/stelprdb1049502.pdf Dust Control from Animal Activity on Open Lot Surfaces, Code 375, USDA-NRCS, Sept. 2010. http://www.nrcs.usda.gov/Internet/FSE_DOCUMENTS/nrcs143_025821.pdf Residue and Tillage Management, Reduced Till, Code 345, USDA-NRCS, Dec. 2013. http://www.nrcs.usda.gov/Internet/FSE_DOCUMENTS/stelprdb1251402.pdf Herbaceous Wind Barriers, Code 603, USDA-NRCS, Jan. 2010. http://www.nrcs.usda.gov/Internet/FSE_DOCUMENTS/nrcs143_025927.pdf Michalewicz, D. A., J. D. Wanjura, B. W. Shaw, and C. B. Parnell. 2005. Evaluation of sources and controls of fugitive dust from agricultural operations. In Proc. 2005 Beltwide Cotton Conference. http://caaqes.tamu.edu/Publication-Particulate%20Matter.html Harner J., Maghirang R., Razote E., Water Requirements for Dust Control on Feedlots, from the proceedings of Mitigating Air Emissions From Animal Feeding Operations Conference, May 2008. http://www.extension.org/pages/23966/water-requirements-for-dust-control-on-feedlots California Air Pollution Control Officers Association Agriculture Clearinghouse http://www.capcoa.org/ag-clearinghouse/ DRAFT Dust Prevention and Control Manual Do not cite or quote – Legal Review Pending Page 40 U.S. Department of Agriculture Natural Resources Conservation Service - Nevada, Fugitive Dust: A Guide to the Control of Windblown Dust on Agricultural Lands in Nevada. Jan. 2007. http://www.cdsn.org/images/FugitiveDustGuide_v7_201_.pdf Demolition and Renovation CDPHE, Demolition and Asbestos Abatement forms and information https://www.colorado.gov/pacific/cdphe/asbestos-forms Earthmoving Activities CDPHE, An Overview of Colorado Air Regulations for Land Development, August 2014 https://www.colorado.gov/pacific/sites/default/files/AP_Land-Development-Guidance-Document_1.pdf Working With Dirt When the Wind Blows http://www.gradingandexcavation.com/GX/Articles/Working_With_Dirt_When_the_Wind_Blows_5455 .aspx EPA – Stormwater Best Management Practices: Dust Control http://water.epa.gov/polwaste/npdes/swbmp/Dust-Control.cfm EPA – Stormwater Best Management Practices: Wind Fences and Sand Fences http://water.epa.gov/polwaste/npdes/swbmp/Wind-Fences-and-Sand-Fences.cfm EPA – Stormwater Best Management Practices: Construction Sequencing http://water.epa.gov/polwaste/npdes/swbmp/Construction-Sequencing.cfm EPA – Stormwater Best Management Practices: Construction Entrances http://water.epa.gov/polwaste/npdes/swbmp/Construction-Entrances.cfm An Overview of Colorado Air Regulations for Land Development. Colorado Department of Public Health and Environment – Air Pollution Control Division. https://www.colorado.gov/pacific/sites/default/files/AP_Land-Development-Guidance-Document_1.pdf Health Effects of Particulate Matter U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Integrated Science Assessment for Particulate Matter. EPA/600/R-08/139F Dec. 2009. http://cfpub.epa.gov/ncea/cfm/recordisplay.cfm?deid=216546#Download World Health Organization, Health Effects of Particulate Matter - Policy. 2013 http://www.euro.who.int/__data/assets/pdf_file/0006/189051/Health-effects-of-particulate-matter- final-Eng.pdf Preventing Silicosis in Construction Workers, NIOSH http://www.cdc.gov/niosh/docs/96-112/ General Dust Abatement Handbook, Maricopa County Air Quality Department, June 2013. http://www.maricopa.gov/aq/divisions/compliance/dust/docs/pdf/Rule%20310-Dust%20Handbook.pdf DRAFT Dust Prevention and Control Manual Do not cite or quote – Legal Review Pending Page 41 Fugitive Dust Control: Self Inspection Handbook, California Air Resources Board, 2007. http://www.arb.ca.gov/pm/fugitivedust_large.pdf WRAP Fugitive Dust Handbook, Western Governors’ Association. Sept. 2006. Managing Fugitive Dust: A Guide for Compliance with the Air Regulatory Requirements for Particulate Matter Generation, Michigan Department of Environmental Quality. March 2014. Colorado Oil and Gas Conservation Commission, Rules and Regulations, Rule 805 Odors and Dust http://cogcc.state.co.us/ -1- ORDINANCE NO. 045, 2015 OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FORT COLLINS AMENDING THE FORT COLLINS LAND USE CODE BY THE ADDITION OF PROVISIONS PERTAINING TO DUST PREVENTION AND CONTROL WHEREAS, on December 2, 1997, by its adoption of Ordinance No. 190, 1997, the City Council enacted the Fort Collins Land Use Code (the "Land Use Code"); and WHEREAS, since the time of adoption, the Land Use Code has been regularly amended not only for the purpose of clarification and correction of errors, but also for the purpose of ensuring that the Land Use Code remains a dynamic document capable of responding to issues identified by staff, other land use professionals and citizens of the City; and WHEREAS, on February 15, 2011, the City Council approved Resolution 2011-015 adopting the City Plan, including the Environmental Health Vision that sets forth an aspirational goal of continuous improvements in air quality; and WHEREAS, City Plan also contains numerous policies supporting air quality, including Policy ENV 8.6 which directs staff to promote prevention of air pollution at its source as the highest priority approach in reducing air pollution emissions; and WHEREAS, in furtherance of the Air Quality Advisory Board’s 2015 Work Program, which identifies regulation of fugitive dust as a priority air quality initiative, City staff has proposed amendment of Chapter 12 of the Fort Collins City Code to protect air quality by adopting dust control and prevention standards set forth in the “Dust Prevention and Control Manual”; and WHEREAS, in addition to amendment of the City Code, City staff has proposed Land Use Code changes to align with such City Code amendments adopting the Dust Prevention and Control Manual; and WHEREAS, City staff has vetted these proposed changes through a Fugitive Dust Working Group composed of contractors, interested stakeholders, and City staff, as well as through numerous public events and a project website; and WHEREAS, the Planning and Zoning Board reviewed the proposed Land Use Code changes regarding fugitive dust at its November 12, 2015, meeting and voted to recommend to the City Council that they be adopted; and WHEREAS, the City Council has determined that the recommended Land Use Code amendments are in the best interest of the City and its citizens. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FORT COLLINS as follows: -2- Section 1. That the City Council hereby makes any and all determinations and findings contained in the recitals set forth above. Section 2. That Section 2.6.3(H) of the Land Use Code is hereby amended to read as follows: . . . 2.6.3 Stockpiling Permit and Development Construction Permit Review Procedures . . . (H) Step 8 (Standards – Stockpiling Permit): Not applicable, and in substitution therefor, an application for a Stockpiling Permit shall be reviewed for compliance with the City Code and all regulations related to such permit adopted by the city by reference or otherwise, as amended, including, without limitation, the erosion control standards as contained in the Stormwater Design Criteria and Construction Standards Manual stormwater criteria manual and the dust control measures contained in the dust control manual to the extent required therein. Step 8 (Standards – Development Construction Permit): Not applicable, and in substitution therefor, an application for a Development Construction Permit shall be reviewed for compliance with the Site Specific Development Plan, the City Code and all regulations related to such permit adopted by the city by reference or otherwise as amended, including, without limitation, the erosion control standards as contained in the stormwater criterial manual and the dust control measures contained in the dust control manual to the extent required therein. . . . Section 3. That Section 2.7.3(G) and 2.7.3(H) of the Land Use Code is hereby amended to read as follows: 2.7.3 Building Permit Review Procedures . . . (G) Step 7 (Public Hearing): Not applicable, and in substitution therefor, an application for a Building Permit shall be processed, reviewed, considered and approved, approved with modifications, or denied by the Building and Zoning Director based on its compliance with the site specific development plan, the City Code and all building regulations related to such permit adopted by the city by reference or otherwise, as amended. -3- (H) Step 8 (Standards): Not applicable, and in substitution therefor, an application for a Building Permit shall be reviewed for compliance with the site specific development plan, the City Code and all building regulations related to such permit adopted by the city by reference or otherwise, as amended; and if the Building Permit is for the enlargement of a building and/or for the expansion of facilities, equipment or structures regulated under the provisions of Division 1.6, such application shall also comply with Division 1.6. . . . Section 4. That Section 3.4.2(A) of the Land Use Code is hereby amended to read as follows: 3.4.2 Air Quality (A) General Standard. The project shall conform to all applicable local, state and federal air quality regulations and standards, including, but not limited to, those regulating odor, dust, fumes or gases which are noxious, toxic or corrosive, and suspended solid or liquid particles. The project shall be designed and constructed to comply with the dust control measures contained in the dust control manual to the extent required therein. . . . Section 5. That the definition “Fugitive Dust” contained in Section 5.1.2 of the Land Use Code is hereby deleted in its entirety as follows: Fugitive dust shall mean solid airborne particulate matter emitted from any source other than an opening which channels the flow of air contaminants and then exhausts the contaminants directly into the atmosphere. Fugitive dust also includes solid particles released into the atmosphere by natural forces or by mechanical processes, such as crushing, grinding, milling, drilling, demolishing, pulverizing, shoveling, conveying, covering, bagging or sweeping. Section 6. That Section 5.1.2 of the Land Use Code is hereby amended by the addition of the following definitions, to be inserted in the listing set forth therein in alphabetical order; Dust control manual shall mean the dust control and prevention standards enacted to protect air quality adopted under the Chapter 12 of the Fort Collins City Code. Stormwater criteria manual shall mean the standards for design, planning, and implementation of practices and improvements to manage stormwater adopted under Chapter 26 of the Fort Collins City Code. Section 7. That the standards set forth herein shall be effective for applications on or after November 1, 2016. -4- Introduced, considered favorably on first reading, and ordered published this 5th day of April, A.D. 2016, and to be presented for final passage on the 19th day of April, A.D. 2016. __________________________________ Mayor ATTEST: _______________________________ City Clerk Passed and adopted on final reading on the 19th day of April, A.D. 2016. __________________________________ Mayor ATTEST: _______________________________ City Clerk fugitive dust. including, but not limited to, a contractor, lessee, or other responsible party of an activity, operation, or land use that is a dust generating activity or source. Particulate matter shall mean any material that is emitted into the air as finely divided solid or liquid particles, other than uncombined water, and includes dust, smoke, soot, fumes, aerosols and mists. Required best management practices shall mean specific measures that are required to be implemented if a dust generating activity is occurring. Sensitive area shall mean a specific area that warrants special protection from adverse impacts due to the deposition of fugitive dust, such as natural areas (excluding buffer zones), sources of water supply, wetlands, critical wildlife habitat, or wild and scenic river corridors. Soil retention shall mean the stabilization of disturbed surface areas that will remain that creates emissions of fugitive dust or causes off-property or off-vehicle transport. Dust generating activity or source shall include a paved parking lot containing an area of more than one half (1/2) acre. Earthmoving shall mean any process that involves land clearing, disturbing soil surfaces, or moving, loading, or handling of earth, dirt, soil, sand, aggregate, or similar materials. Fugitive dust shall mean solid particulate matter emitted into the air by mechanical negative, impact likely Very negative, impact expected  Proposal supports the policy to continually improve air quality  Proposal supports the policy to strive to protect human health  Proposal supports water quality and stormwater management requirements  Proposal does not support water conservation policy  Fast-growing cover crops used for re-seeding may be very water intensive. provide training and support in preparation for implementation.  Staff will develop a Public Engagement Plan to provide clear messaging about the ordinance and that compliance will not always result in zero dust being transported off site.  If the ordinance passes, staff will actively engage with the public and conduct outreach to reach a range of demographics. cleanup this is estimated to be 0.2% of total project cost Vacuum System Deposition Removal N/A $2,500 Removing deposition left on the site and in the street will be removed by Vacuum system water. Project Total: $600,000 Mitigation Total: $6,090 $7080-$8580 Required: 1.0% of Project Total Additional: 1.2% - 1.4% of Project Total ($40) Site/Street Cleanup Track- out/Carry- out Deposition Removal $700 N/A Manually removing deposition left on the site and in the street will be removed by push broom and water. Depending on the size of the site and frequency of cleanup this is estimated to be 0.2% of total project cost Project Total: $365,090 Mitigation Total: $6,090 $4580-$6080 Required BMPs: 1.7% of Project Total Additional BMPs: 1.3% - 1.7% of Project Total control 5. Horsetooth and Timberline Intersection $32,420 $3,320 $35,740 $3,304,501 1.1% (1.0% required) Actual costs 6. 222 Laporte City Building $40,000 $10,000 $50,000 $10,000,000 0.5% (0.4% required) Actual costs ATTACHMENT 2 required) Actual costs 6. 222 Laporte City Building $40,000 $10,000 $50,000 $10,000,000 0.5% (0.4% required) Actual costs 3. Tracking of dust complaints To begin to track the overall number and type of complaints associated with dust generating activities, staff has developed a tracking spreadsheet that is available on a SharePoint site, where all City staff can access, enter, and track complaints. Two complaints in 2016 have been entered thus far. The spreadsheet has been shared with the Air Quality Advisory Board and Fugitive Dust Working Group and amended based on their feedback. 4. The Hybrid Approach to Preventing, Minimizing, and Controlling Dust Based on feedback from Council, staff has developed the following hybrid approach for preventing, minimizing, and controlling fugitive dust: 1. All projects must cover loads of aggregate material (Section 3.6 of the Manual) and implement the required saw cutting and grinding best management practices (Section 3.10 of the Manual). 2. All projects must comply with the provisions outlined in the Dust Control Manual, except that residential projects under 10,000 square feet (measured by lot size) are exempt from this requirement (though they are still required to prevent and control dust, but they do not have to use the best management practices outlined in the Manual). o There are two exceptions to this rule:  First, if a builder is constructing multiple lots that are contiguous to each other, and the total area of these contiguous lots exceeds 10,000 square feet, then the Manual applies.  Second, if a builder or operator receives two written warnings within a one year period, then the builder or operator has to utilize the Dust Control Manual to address fugitive dust on their site. 3. Staff is proposing that enforcement of these regulations be delayed until November 1, 2016, in order to allow for training and outreach to occur prior to enforcement. These requirements are further described below: