Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutReport - Read Before Packet - 8/4/2020 - Updated Powerpoint Slides For Nisp Agenda Item - Item Number 171 8-4-20 City comments to the NISP 1041 Application Jen Shanahan, Watershed Planner. Cameron Gloss, Long Range Planning Manager 2 City comments to the NISP 1041 Application Jen Shanahan, Cameron Gloss1. Context •NISP projects overview •City’s engagement, themes 2. Local planning •1041 scope and process •City staff’s technical comments •Natural Areas impacts 3. What’s next Proactive efforts 3 Water for 15 municipalities 4 Northern Integrated Supply Project 5 Project simulations and videos 6 https://www.northernwater.org/kentico/nisp Infrastructure impacts in the GMA: Poudre Intake Pipeline 7 Benefits associated with the Poudre Intake Pipeline 9 Federal • Clean Water Act 404 Permit & National Environmental Policy Act • Clean Water Action 401 Certification State • Colorado Fish & Wildlife Mitigation Plan County • Larimer County 1041 Approval City • Site Plan Advisory Review • Natural Areas Easement Policy Regulatory processes 1041 Review SPAR History 2004 2008 Final EIS 2015 2017 2018 2019 2020 401 Certification Permitting begins Draft EIS Supplemental draft EIS Fish and Wildlife Plan Record of Decision Themes in City’s legacy of engagement 12 Protecting Fort Collins water related assets • Water quality, reclamation • Stormwater capacity and community flood resilience • Water supply Protecting and sustaining environmental assets • Natural Areas, Stormwater, Parks in floodplain Systemic Poudre River Health New Theme: Local planning, local infrastructure impacts Previous Council Direction City staff 1041 referral comments are aligned with City’s current position on NISP, as stated in City Council Resolution 2018-093. “the City Council cannot support NISP as it is currently described and proposed in the Final Environmental Impact Statement (FEIS) with the understanding that the City Council may reach a different conclusion with respect to a future variant of NISP and its mitigation plan…” What is the 1041 Regulation? 1041 Regulation is designed to: • ensure compliance with local master plans and • environmental, public health, and safety standards •is focused on impacts, temporary and permanent, within the footprint of project infrastructure •is not focused on comprehensive environmental impacts in the same way as the Environmental Impacts Statements 14 NISP 1041 Scope Scope for Larimer County • developments and construction impacts • recreation on Glade Reservoir Scope for the Fort Collins comments to the County • technical review within GMA • diversion structure and pipelines near Mulberry corridor • includes impacts on city properties City review process City departments involved • Development Review • Natural Areas • Utilities • Traffic • Engineering • Parks Planning Categories 1. Environmental Review 2. Visitor Use 3. Natural Areas County’s 12 Review criteria 16 1041 comments Key comments in general City review 1. Redo pipeline siting analysis and evaluate additional routes 2. Provide consistency on impacts predicted for wetlands across NISP documents 3. Develop baseline habitat characterization 4. Resolve conflicts with buffers in Land Use Code and other City criteria 17 Intersection with Natural Areas 18 Visitor Use Impacts 19 Sensitive habitats and Natural Areas 20 Homestead: diversion, wetlands, visitor use 21 Kingfisher: pipeline in floodplain, sale of property 22 Riverbend: Sensitive habitats, groundwater, visitor use 23 Next steps Public hearings A. Larimer County Planning Commission (public process completed) B. Larimer County Board of County Commissioners. • August 24, 31. Public testimony • September 2., Q&A and deliberation/decision night - no public testimony The City will require a Site Plan Advisory Review “SPAR” for these same infrastructure impacts within the GMA. SPAR Application anticipated fall 2020. 24 Staff recommendation 1. Present the City’s comments to the Larimer County Commissioners on August 24th or 31st 2. Resolution: “Cannot support this variant of NISP” • Aligned with City’s approach over past 14 years • Continue to optimize outcomes • Protect community resources and investments 25 Discussion 26