HomeMy WebLinkAboutMinutes - Water Resources - January 12, 2009 CITY OF BOULDER, COLORADO
BOARDS AND COMMISSIONS MEETING SUMMARY FORM
NAME OF BOARD/COMMISSION: Water Resources Adviso Board
DATE OF MEETING: January 12, 2009
NAMEITELEPHONE OF PERSON PREPARING SUMMARY: Suzanne Lieberman, 303-441-3266
NAMES OF MEMBERS, COUNCIL, STAFF, AND INVITED GUESTS PRESENT:
BOARD MEMBERS -Bart Miller, Robin Byers, Kelly DiNatale, William DeOreo, Susan loft
STAFF-Ned Williams; Bre[ Linenfelser; Cazol Ellinghouse; Joe Taddeucci; Kim Hutton; Joanna Crean;
Donna Scott; Alice Guthrie -Pazks and Recreation; Joy Master -Parks and Recreation; Jeff Arthur-
Planning and Development Services; Katie Knapp -Planning and Development Services; Claudia Brown -
consultant, Biohabitats, Inc.; Matt Claussen -Parks and Recreation; Chad Julian -Parks and Recreation
Adviso Board PRAB ;Chris Douville -coordinator, Wastewater Treatment Piant.
WHAT TYPE OF MEETING BOLD ONE REGULAR SPECIAL UASI-JUDICIAL
Agenda Item 1 -Call to Order
The meeting was called to order at 7:08 p.m.
Agenda Item 2 -Meeting Minutes -November 17, 2008 and December 15, 2008.
Motion: Miller -Move to approve November ]7, 2008 minutes as amended.
Seconded: Byers
Vote: SO in favor, Motion passed
[Iott arrives at 7:13 p.m.] WRAB agreed to review the December 15 minutes at the Pebruary 23, 2009
meeting.
Agenda Item 3 -Public Participation and Comment.
Chris Copp: Water fluoridation. Previously corresponded with DeOreo, forwarded to WRAB. Wants
WRAB to look squarely at facts. National Research Council report on 4 ppm safety standard -toxic effects
to all body systems. Would be willing to help out in the future with presentations, speakers. Miller: Voters
took up the issue m 2007 and it was defeated; hot topic for about a year. Not sure when the issue is up
again or would be taken up otherwise. DeOreo: Incumbent on ciTy to show that fluoridation is safe and
effective, and he is not convinced. A question of whether city should take it up again with public hearing.
DiNatale: Discusses differences between academy study levels and drinking water application levels. Last
time, it was a problem with [race contaminants in the fluoride, disguised problem. Copp: Still doesn't
change the fact that fluoride is not safe. Byers: This has [o pass by citizen vote and [hat means i[ has to be
referred by Council or be a citizen's initiative. Miller: WRAB will have to decide if it wants to bring up
issue again.
7:32 p.m. Closure of Public Comment on non-agenda items.
Agenda Item 4
Matters from Board -
• DiNatale: Status on fluoride application for a future meeting? Williams: Yes. Byers: Also give
proponents of Clean Water Advocates ballot item notice of agenda item as a courtesy.
• DiNatale: Fourmile and Wonderland Creeks floodplain issues status. Williams: Council did
not take action on agenda item in November but wanted to further talk about floodplain
management issues at April 28th study session; hopefully will have further info to bring back to
WRAB afterwards. Council's concerns included school emergency evacuations and whether to
apply non-containment policy as with Boulder Creek or at least consistency with other floodways.
• DeOreo: Drought Response Plan agenda item. Wants it to be a set of policy recommendations,
not just a discussion, Has drafted a 1-page set of drought response and planning recommendations
[distributes handout]. Wants WRAB [o think about policies to recommend to Council. Has
incorporated research from meeting with state drought coordinator and incorporated work from
National Drought Center, Colorado Drought Response Plan (CWCB). Asks for break-down of
water use b block.
WRAB Summary
January 12, 2009
Page No. 1
• DiNatale: Would like to see breakdown of water use by block (commercial, residential), fit into
water budgets from summer 2008, and compared to 2007. DeOreo: Suggests putting this data in
2008 Annual Report with monthly usage by block for each class.
Matters from Staff -
• Williams: WRAB meeting location. 29'h Street Conference room has 9:00 PM closing-time. So
three options: 29'" Street with 6-9 PM meeting; 13th Street Conference room without time
constraints or continue to meet at Yards. loft: 13`" Street big enough to accommodate public here
tonight. Miller: Also good proximity to bus. Miller: WRAB will vote later in the meeting.
Agenda Item 5 -Public hearing and consideration of a motion recommending a management option
for Thunderbird Lake at Burke Park. (7:45 PM)
Guthrie gave the presentation. The purpose ofthis item is to provide the Water Resources Advisory Board
(WRAB) with additional information on potential management options for Thunderbird Lake as discussed
at the December 15, 2008 WRAB meeting. The WRAB is asked to make a recommendation to the City
Council on a management option for the lake. Along with the Parks and Recreation Advisory Board's
(PRAB) recommendation and public input, the WRAB's recommendation will be provided [o City Council
at the February 17, 2009 meeting. PRAB voted at their September 22, 2008 meeting 5-2 to approve Option
B, Adaptive Management - No Supplemental Water.
The key elements identified for Thunderbird Lake are the changing hydrology of the area and the capital
and ongoing funds that will be required for ongoing management of the lake. Staff and consultants have
been investigating actions to manage the lake including evaluating ways to add water. A comprehensive
evaluation of each considered option can be found in Attachment A and was provided to the WRAB on
December 15.
Recognizing that a plan of action had not yet been determined for Thunderbird Lake, $200,000 for potential
capital improvements was approved in the 2009 Capital Improvement Program (CIP) budget. When a
management option is identified, Parks and Recreation Department staff will determine the ongoing
maintenance costs of the recommended option and discuss funding options, include re-prioritizing current
work tasks or identifying trade-offs or reductions in service levels. In 2008, approximately $115,000 has
been spent on consultants and management actions, not including staff time. These expenses were funded
by a supplemental budget request.
To assist in the decision-making process, staff has included a matrix of benefits and impacts for each option
(Attachment A-1) and has provided additional information on cost estimates for each option (Attachment
B). These documents were provided to the WRAB in the December I5, 2008 meeting packet Responses
to questions raised by WRAB members a[ the December 15 meeting are included in Attachment C.
Staff recommendation to PRAB was for Adaptive Management. The WRAB is asked to recommend a
management strategy, given the City Council 5lters of economic, enviromnental and social sustainability.
Questions to Staff from WRAB: Could alternatives be revisited on a yearly basis? Difference in wetland
permit between options? Amount of water needed to fill? (5.5 acre-feet to bring up to old high-water mark;
2-acre surface area; park irrigation is 12-15"/year.) Possibly making system more complicated than it
needs to be. Age of lake? (Early 19006-19206.) Date of Frasier Meadows development? (ca. 19606.) Start
of water quality issues? (ca. early 20006 drought.) Justification for wetlands permit? Groundwater flow
situation? Impacts of Frasier Meadows development? Is wetlands permit fee waivable? Is a hybrid of
options solution (e.g., fill and well) a possibility? Is there a preference to let this area become a wet
meadow by succession rather than maintain it as a man-made feature?
Public Comment: (8:53 p.m.)
• Chuck Howe: Residents have been fighting for five years to prevent deterioration; human values
missing from argument, aesthetics of lake as a recreational area, large retirement community, not
just about ecosystem health; lake supports Arleigh Burke memorial. Consensus about this at
public hearings. Frasier Manor -sump pumps have not run in last 18 months; wetland dry for two
ears. Feels communi wants to fill from ci water su lies, which would also im rove water
WRAB Summary
January 12, 2009
Page No. 2
quality. Byers: Is it accurate from the packet that design/siting of Arleigh Burke memorial not
major consideration or was there a master plan? Howe: Not in the area when memorial was
established, but military officer's group maintaining monument strongly supports citizen's group
position.
• Bill Sabin: Seniors other than those associated with Frasier Meadows use lake; should be
managed as an urban park, not open space. Lott: Willingness to pay of surrounding residents?
Howe: Hard to calculate, but budget doesn't seem like an issue for residents.
• Marylee Zurick: President of The Happy Hazels -Frasier Meadows women's goup. Younger
families moving into neighborhood now. Mosquitoes a big problem. Not wetlands, which
resulted from the drought, and no[ open space. Would like city to listen to neighbors, who are
unanimous on the issue, and help them fix the lake. Neighbors not interested in adaptive
management. Part of our taxes could be used to pay for i[; already maintaining medians and
flowers. Byers: Preferzed alternatives? Zurick: Likes dual option, or even dredging and starting
over.
• Chad Julian: Vice Chair of PRAB. Didn't take formal action on potable water issue. Considered
the lake unnatural, built for irrigation. Lowered water table has many causes, as discussed. Main
issues -costs, timeliness, setting precedent, e.g. Viele Lake, sustainability, impact to departrnent's
workload, neighborhood involvementlsetting expectations, water budgets, impact of treated water
usage. Byers: Neighborhood concerns? Turnout? Julian: About 100 at first meeting, no[ many at
PRAB meeting where final vote was taken. DeDreo: WRAB has never gotten comprehensive
water budget from Parks, making it difficult to decide re: whether potable water use reasonable;
any way of obtaining budget? Julian: Sounds good in theory, but difficult in practice. Guthrie: In
the future, water budget discussion on PRAB calendar, we work closely with Williams and Crean.
WiQiams: City has established water budgets for all municipal meters. DeDreo: WRAB needs to
see water budgets from other departments to help inform discussion: e.g. acres irzigated, mixture
of plants, actual use.
• Jim Knopf: Straggled with water budgets being on WRAB for five years. City should think about
Thunderbird Lake in the context of the water budget and drought management plan. Has been
asked many times about evapotranspiration of similar azeas: numbers for Kentucky Bluegrass
lawn conversion alternative don't add up -should result in 18 gallons per square foot, not 15,
assuming full watering. Sump pumps/changing water levels: took up similar issue of wet meadow
north of Baseline near South Boulder Creek, which was related to north-south line of houses
pumping basements, so Planning Board needs [o address increasing impact of pumping
groundwater because of cumulative effects. Zurick: Neighborhood pulled together twice with
hundreds of people speaking in a unanimous voice. Convinced we got our point across, but we
haven't -frustrating.
9:22 p.m. Close of Public Comment.
WRAB discussion included:
Clarifications: rationalization for discharge permit; rationalization for wetland permits under existing
code; need for purchasing water rights for augmentation based on augmentation plan and whether for
Boulder Creek orjust South Boulder Creek; discussion of various options for transferzing water rights. For
options A and B, whether staff/boards will be revisiting chosen plan in terms of adaptive management up
for discussion; for options B and C, difference in scope of wetland permits; clarifrcation of water quantity
for single-fill; clariflcation of impacts on groundwater flow and of groundwater flow on lake level; whether
a permit fee waiver for the wetland permit possible because it is an infra-city application process, whether
timing for development review realistic; discussion of desired option if money not a factor; need for
timeliest option, partly because of elderly residents. If using potable water; temporary dechlorination
options for single- and multiple-fills. PRAB hasn't made decisions system-wide, only for Thunderbird.
Discussion: whether W RAB needs to see Parks' water budgets before making a recommendation on a
articular o lion; whether recommendation is within WRAB's mandate in terms of whether the
WRAB Summary
January 12, 2009
Page No.3
recommendation involves a "water resource" (most likely, if long-term) and emphasizing the conservation
aspect of water in the recommendation; preference for C or D because both options currently budgeted and
align with public consensus. Option D as the preferred alternative since four acre-feet of water insignificant
in terms of overall system, but making dechlorination cheaper. Putting Parks' water budget in drought
response plan so WRAB is not telling Parks what to do. Rationale for Parks paying for Thunderbird
restoration versus other water uses. Larger issue of groundwater decline raised by Knopf more troubling:
being mote realistic about what city maintains, also in terms of precedent. Praise for thoroughness of
alternatives. Potable water ok but encourage Parks to seek out better investments in terms ofnon-potable
options. Discussion of how/whether a drought would affect recommendation.
Motion (DeOreo):
Whereas:
1. The official policy of the City of Boulder is for all water use in the City to be governed by approved
water budgets. Baseline water budgets allow 15 gallons per square foot (24 inches) of water for
maintenance of turf, and we see no reason why maintaining lake levels is any less valid a use for water than
maintenance of turf;
2. Use of potable water for maintenance of lake levels is acceptable to WRAB as long as this is done within
the context of an overall water budget and drought response plan for the park.
Therefore, WRAB makes the following recommendation with respect to Thunderbird Lake at Burke Park:
Of the 8 options presented to WRAB, we would recommend the use of Option D (Potable Water -multiple
fills per year), but encourage [he Parks Department to continue to investigate alternatives to develop other
non-potable options.
Seconded: Miller
Vote: 3-2 in favor, Motion passed.
Dissent (loft): Although only 4 acre-feet of water per year involved, plan is no[ consistent with Boulder
Valley Comprehensive Plan on sustainable resources, use of adaptive management and PRAB better
equipped to handle the problem than WRAB.
Dissent (Byers): Ok with filling with potable water short-term (Option D) but agrees with residents that
human side of the issue has been ignored; City created covenant with the neighborhood to maintain the lake
when lake was established, and also when Burke memorial was established, and needs to honor i[; potable
water £II option just aband-aid. A permanent solution is needed, with a groundwater well, Option E, as [he
best long-term option.
[Discussion of whether [o postpone remaining agenda items due to lateness of hour or proceed with all
agenda items as scheduled. WRAB decided to proceed with [he agenda as scheduled. A brief recess was
taken, after which the scheduled agenda resumed.]
Agenda Item 6 -Recommendation to City Council on the Source Water Master Plan (SWMP).
[WRAB recommenced at 10:22 PM.]
Taddeucci gave the presentation. Staff hand delivered an updated final draft of Volume I and a final draft
of Volume II of the SWMP at the November 17, 2008 meeting. During that meeting staff and WRAB
members discussed that the WRAB anticipates taking two meetings (Dec.15 and ]an.12) to review,
comment and make a final recommendation on the SWMP.
At the December 15, 2008 meeting staff and WRAB members discussed Volume lI of the S WMP. WRAB
members provided input on a number of items. Those items and staff's recommended resolutions are
summarized in the memo.
Public Comment: There was none.
WRAB Discussion included: p. 4 -whether "prescribed" the correct word - no, a finding, more than a
recommendation -than ed to "deli nated"; . 2 0 - olicies re ardin the sourcewater "is"; . 5-70
WRAB Summary
January 12, 2009
Page No. 4
whether sentence is supposed to end with ellipsis -staff will check. [All page numbers pertain to the
memo, referencing Volume II of the SWMP.]
Motion (Byers): Move that WRAB recommend to City Council the Source Water Master Plan in its latest
iteration including edits made in [he meeting memo for the January 12, 2009 WRAB meeting.
Seconded: Miller
Vote: SO in favor, Motion passed.
Agenda Item 7 -WRAB consideration of prioritization [or the "Opportunities for Improvement"
identified in American Water Works Association (AWWA)/Water Environment Federation (WEF)
Peer Review Report.
Crean gave the presentation. On October 17, 2008 [he American Water Works Association (AWWA)/
Water Environment Federation (WEF) peer review of the Utilities water and wastewater operations was
completed. A report was provided to WRAB and staff which identified both strengths and opportunities for
improvement. Staffmetwith WRAB on Dec. 15, 2008 to solicit feedback on [he guiding principles and
prioritization method for developing an implementation plan. The feedback has been incorporated and an
initial prioritization of the opportunities for improvement was to be presented to WRAB at the Tan. 12,
2009 meeting. Feedback will be incorporated and a proposed implementation plan will be distributed to
City Council in a Weekly Information Packet memorandum in Mazch, 2009.
Public Comment: There was none.
WRAB Discussion included: discomfort with having WRAB's roles and responsibilities (Item No. 2) get
Implementation Priority 1 Tier ranking, when WRAB had low input into ranking process; clarification of
rationale for pay-as-you-go bonding (no. 42 a[ page 9 and no. 74 at page 7); whether concern with city
holding reserves has more to do with reserves or the way city is paying off its bonds. Request for more
detail (i.e., which workgroups) on "opportunity for improving" item pertaining to "some workgroups
consistently overrun budgets" (no. 43). Shifting Boulder Canyon Hydro from a 2 to a 1 in terms of moving
faster as an energy issue (no. 61) or at least splitting issue into Tier 1 and Tier 2. Whether Utilities getting
help with solar panel issue. Discussion of safety items as always Tier 1. Rationale for not including
analysis an treated water main breaks. Rationale for no. 60 getting Tier 2 ranking if city is currently
working on it. Discussion of next steps: staff will incorporate results into budget process over next few
years, particularly the Tier 1 and 2 items.
Agenda Item 8 -Update and feedback on the Water Quality Strategic Plan.
Scott and Linenfelser gave [he presentation. A Water Quality Strategic Plan (WQSP) is being developed
by Utilities staff in coordination with [he Planning Department. The purpose of the WQSP is to define the
city's goals for water quality and develop strategies to achieve these goals. The WQSP will be
implemented by the Water Quality and Environmental Services (WQES) Group, within the Utilities
Division. This item provides an overview of the draft WQSP and responds to comments received from
WRAB members during the meeting on July 21, 2008.
Public Comment: There was none.
WRAB Discussion included: What partnerships are involved with monitoring and to what extent work
will be farmed out to labs? Need for Council to know we have funding shortage to implement the plan but
giving Nederland money for W WTP improvements through an IGA. Pros and cons of upgrading the
Nederland W WTP, prioritization of issues and who should be responsible for funding the Nederland
W WTP. Some praise for report and some criticism: too much repetition of recommendations without
clarifying plan with clear strategies; next part will include action items -this is only the overarching
document. Confusion with recommendations appearing before performance measures; table on p. 10 out of
place. Suggestion to include most interesting parameters for each stream reach on maps, make interactive.
Whether to list among emerging contaminants natural or only man-made endocrine disruptors.
Agenda Item 9 -Update on Water Quality Studies, Regulations and Permitting.
Douville and Linenfelser gave the presentation. The Water Quality and Environmental Services (WQES)
Group and the Wastewater Treatment Group are workingjointly on various water quality studies to address
current and future re ulations. These re ulations affect both the 75`" Street wastewater treatment facili
WRAB Summary
January 12, 2009
Page No. 5
water quality standards for Boulder Creek. In 2008, nitrogen modeling was completed in the Boulder
Creek and St. Vrain Creek basins to update the 2003 ammonia total maximum daily load (TMDL). The
update addressed new state-wide ammonia water quality standards and a new ammonia model.
In January 2008, the 75`" Street W WTF Colorado Discharge Permit System (CDPS) discharge permit
expired and was administratively extended by the Colorado Water Quality Control Division (Division). A
CDPS permit renewal application was submitted to the Division in August, 2007. Additionally in 2008,
WQES staff were actively involved in vazious Division Work Groups and water quality studies to address
new regulatory requirements and water quality standards for temperature, nutrients, bacteria (E. co[i),
nonylphenol and emerging contaminants.
All of these efforts aze linked together with the results of special studies and Work Group participation
helping to support the 75d' Street W WTF CDPS permit renewal process, the city's MS4 stormwater permit,
and help the City of Boulder plan for future regulatory impacts.
Public Comment: There was none.
WRAB Discussion included: effects of 2002 drought on baseline flow measurement; clarification of
method and variables involved in measuring ammonia; whether there are back-up systems. Involvement in
middle school and elementary school education. 30-day averages probably reachable; daily maximums
maybe problematic. Temperature modifications for nitrogen until approx. 2011. Consistency of standards
over state with H2O Jo as state-wide symbol ;whether there will be a driver for enforcement to generate
cash for some of the agencies; whether city has reserves to deal with penalties. Causes of Boulder's
relatively high copper effluent concentration. Role for WRAB? Boulder can do its own studies to try to
have state EPA raise effluent limits because laboratory studies do not currently sufFiciently represent
natural conditions. Use of matrix in memo as a product. Breakdown of substances at Boulder's last
pharmaceutical take-back day only in terms of controlled substances.
Agenda Item 10 -Discussion of schedule and agenda items for future meetings.
Relocation of WRAB meetings. 29d' Street out because of time constraints. WRAB agrees to try 13d'
Street Conference Room (if available) for the February 23`d meeting.
Agenda Item 11 -Adjournment
Motion: Motion to adjourn by Byers.
Seconded by: Miller
Vote: 5-0 in favor, passed.
Meeting adjourned at 12:28 AM.
Date, Time, and Location of Next Meeting:
The next WRAB meeting will be Monday, February 23rd - 7 p.m.*, regular meeting, special date, at [he
13d' Street Conference Room (if available) unless otherwise decided b staff and the board.
These are summary minutes. Audio tapes for full record are available through Central Records or on the
WRAB web site. /~n ~j
Minutes approved by: Lam. f ~ ~(~AII tmUUJ Vrte-
I Date: 7./~/0 4 C 3 u~
~n^,
WRAB Summary
January 12, 2009
Page No. 6