Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMeeting Packet - Water Resources Advisory Board - 12/17/2012 WATER RESOURCES ADVISORY BOARD MEETING Monday, 17 December 2012 7:00 p.m. 1777 West Conference Room 1777 Broadway Agenda Highlights: 1. Call to order. (7:00 p.m.) 11. Approval of minutes from the 19 November meeting (7:01 p.m.) III. *Public Comment Period. (7:05 p.m.) IV. Matters • From the Board (7:10 p.m.) o Response to City Council Request for Input on 2013 Priorities o Greenways Advisory Committee Item 28`h Street CEAP o WRAB Retreat Follow-up • From Staff (8:55 p.m.) V. *Public hearing and WRAB consideration of a recommendation to City Council regarding the Keep it Clean Partnership (9:00 p.m.) VI. Information Item - Update on Critical Facilities Ordinance (9:05 p.m.) VII. Discussion about Future Schedule (9:35 p.m.) VIII. Adjournment. (9:50 p.m.) * Public Comment Item Information: Contact the WRAB Secretary, Laurel Olsen-Horen at (303) 441-3203 or olsenl()bouldercolorado.gov . Packets are available in the reference section of the Main Library and on-line at http://www.bouldereolorado.gov, Departments, Public Works, Utilities, Water Resources Advisory Board. Agenda item times are approximate. Information Memo for December 1. Water Conservation Rebates Water Resources Advisory Board Response 2013 Council Retreat Questions for Boards and Commissions (1) What are your top priorities within the framework of the council work plan? Top Priorities: 1. Floodplain Management • South Boulder Creek Mitigation • Critical Facilities • Education and outreach 2. Water supply • Continue to monitor climate change impacts on water supply • Continue to monitor drought plan • Deal with upcoming supply issues (e.g., Carter Lake Pipeline) • Identify sustainability indicators related to water 3. Civic Center • Work with other advisory boards to help develop vision of multi-modal civic area keeping in mind a safe footprint that does not increase city or citizens' exposure to flood risk (2) What would You like to see done that would advance the Council Goals? • The city has valuable water infrastructure that provides an excellent quality of life and attracts economic development to our community. City investments should continue to be made in this infrastructure. • The city has been proactive in protecting citizens from flood risk and needs to continue to update its flood maps and educate the population on flood risks. • City Council may want to hold a series of community town halls to discuss water issues, including infrastructure issues, drought and supply issues, and flood awareness. (3) How can your board help reach the council goals? • Provide opinions on water-related issues for consideration by Board members • Perform independent review of water-related studies and designs performed by outside consultants • Bring state-of-practice input to the Board for consideration when evaluating technologies for implementation • Develop ideas for future planning relative to water supply, flood control, and waste water treatment • Identify upcoming issues /problems that will face the City for staff to consider in planning (4) Are there any other items that council should address in the coming year? 0 To be discussed and voted on at the December meeting, CITY OF BOULDER, COLORADO BOARDS AND COMMISSIONS MEETING: MINU'T'ES Name of Board / Commission: Water Resources Advisory Board Date of Meeting: 19 November 2012 Contact Information of Pcrson Preparing Minutes: Laurel Olsen-Horen; 303-441-3203 Board Members Present: Susan full, Chuck Howe, Vicki Scharnhorst, Dan Johnson Board Members Absent: Kate Ryan Staff Present: Jeff Arthur, Director of Public Works for Utilities Bob Harberg, Engineering Project Management Coordinator Bret Linenfelser, Water Quality and Environmental Services Coordinator Jeft'Dillon, Parks and Planning Superintendent Chris DOUVilIc. Wastewater Treatment Plant Coordinator Douglas Sullivan, Fngincering Project Manager Cole Sigmon, Process Optimization Specialist Annie Noble, Greenways Coordinator Christie Coleman, Engineering Project Manager Ken Baird, Utilities Financial Analyst Laurel Olsen-1 toren, Board Secretary Meeting Type: Regular Agenda Item I - Call to Order 17:02 p.m.] This meeting was called to order at 7:04 p.m. Agenda item 2 - Approval of the 15 October 2012 Meeting Minutes: 17:03 p.m.] Motion to approve the 15 October minutes as presented by: Scharnhorst; Seconded by: Johnson Motion Passes; 4:0 Agenda Item 3 - Public Participation and Comment [7:04 p.m.1 Public Comment: None - David Leserman will be addressing the board for the High Hazard 'Gone agenda item at the time of the agenda. Agenda Item 4 - Motion to move Matters from the Board and Staff to the end of the WRAB meeting Moved by: Johnson, Seconded by: lott Vote: 4:0 Agenda Item 5 - Update on Thunderbird Lake Pilot Project 17:05 p.m.] Bret Linenfelser and Jeff Dillon presented item to the board. Executive Summary from Packet Materials: In 2007, members of the community contacted the City of Boulder (city) Parks and Recreation Advisory Board (PRAB) and City Council requesting that the city increase the water level of Thunderbird Lake and improve its aesthetic quality. Parks and Recreation developed management options for consideration and the decision was made to provide supplemental water to Thunderbird Lake as part of a pilot project. Details on the history of Thunderbird Lake, and management options considered, are documented in the February 27, 2012 Water Resources Advisory Board (WRAB) agenda, which can be found at the following link tx~~~a_.bc~uldcrcolor~tdo.LUV%!i esil Itlties 1~'It:11312012"2013-3iAgends 5 - I'hun 1~ Lrhii_~Lt~~ll In early 2012, at the recommendation of Utilities and Parks and Recreation staff, the PRAB, WRAB and City Council supported continuing the Thunderbird Lake pilot project through 2012, which is one year longer than the initial pilot project schedule. Parks and Recreation recently completed the fourth and final year of the Thunderbird Lake pilot project and a summary of the 2012 pilot project findings, and recommendations, is provided in Attachment A. Parks and Recreation recommends moving forward with using an adaptive management approach to managing Thunderbird Lake with a water surface elevation goal between 5314 feet and 5312 feet. Studies completed over the 2012 season support that a water surface elevation in the range of 5314 feet to 5312 feet can be achieved without the addition of potable water. Parks and Recreation proposes to monitor Thunderbird Lake in future years and will coordinate with Utilities if it is determined that potable water is needed to meet Thunderbird Lake management goals. Parks and Recreation is not requesting any special considerations related to owblc water use, water budgets, or Plant Investment Fee. As a result, no formal WRAB Minutes 19 November 2012 Page No. 1 action by the WRAB is requested at this time. WRAB Discussion Included: 17:13 p.m.] • Kudos to the staff tier working so well with the students at horizon. • As this was an information item, the board asked some clan lying questions of the memo to obtain a better understanding of the agenda item. Agenda Item 6 - Update on Wastewater Treatment Facility Nutrient Compliance Study ]7:25 p.m.] Chris Douville and Douglas Sullivan presented item to the board. Power Point presentation given for this item. Executive Summary from Packet Materials: The City of Boulder (city) 75`h Street wastewater treatment facility (WWTF) received a new Colorado Discharge Permit System (CDPS) discharge permit which became effective May 1, 2011. Permit limits of most concern in the new permit are low daily maximum ammonia limits, daily maximum nitrate limits, and a low monthly average arsenic limit. A monitoring only requirement for temperature is also included in the permit and could lead to a temperature effluent limit in the future. A copper temporary modification is effective in the permit until December 31, 2015 to address potential non- compliance with copper effluent limits and allow time to develop a site-specific approach for compliance. The CDPS permit includes a compliance schedule for ammonia, nitrate, arsenic, temperature, and copper, and multiple progress reports are also required. In June 2012, the Colorado Water Quality Control Commission (Commission) approved technology-based nutrient effluent limits, through Regulation 85, for total inorganic nitrogen (TIN) and total phosphorus (TP). The Commission also approved restrictive water quality standards, through Regulation 3I, for nitrogen; phosphorus, and chlorophyll a (algae). Both Regulation 85 and Regulation 31 will impact the 75th Street WWTF, but at different times. Regulation 85 requirement,, will be implemented into the next CDPS discharge permit, possibly in 2016. Regulation 31 requirements become effective May 31, 2022 and resulting effluent limits would be irnplcmented into the 75`h Street WWTF pert-nit around 2026 (year estimated based on 5-year permit renewal cycles). Staff initiated technical and regulatory studies to evaluate options for meeting future effluent limits liar the current CDPS permit and future nutrient regulations under Regulation 85 and 31. Planning level cost evaluations are also being completed and should be available in November 2012 for current permit limits and Regulation 85 and 31 requirements. The WWTF regulatory update is being presented as an information item and formal action by WRAB is not required. Compliance with, and monitoring of, future regulations will require W WfF capital improvements and require staff time to monitor regulatory developments by actively participating in state work groups. There are significant cost implications to meet future regulations and those costs will be reflected in the CIP budget, which will require WRAB consideration. This update provides the regulatory basis for future capital improvements and provides WRAB with an opportunity to ask questions and provide input on WWTF compliance strategics. WRAB Discussion Included: 18:08 p.m.] • There seems to be a sense that the process to meet regulation 31 may not be possible, what's the likelihood of that happening? Staff response: Staff believes that we will be successful. The cost would be very large, > $100M so the pushback irom multiple communities will likely happen. . • With increased conservation efforts, which would lead to reduced flows, what will that do to concentration levels? Staff response: we would expect that out loadings would still go up modestly. As this was an informational item, no action was taken b the board. Agenda Item 7 - High Hazard Flood Zone Regulations [8:35 p.m.] Christie Coleman and Annie Noble presented item to the board. Power Point presentation given for this item. Executive Summary from Packet Materials: C;ach year in the United States, natural disasters, including flood events, take the lives of hundreds of people, injure thousands more and cost billions of dollars in damage. The risk of flash flooding is an important issue for the City of Boulder, primarily due to its location at the mouth of Boulder Canyon and WRAB Minutes 19 November 2012 Page No. 2 other canyon crocks- By the time an impending major flash flood is identified, it will likely be too late to take any significant action to protect structures or coordinate a thorough evacuation effort. As a result, the city's flood management program primarily focuses on proactive efforts such as improving drainage way capacities, ensuring that structures within the floodplain are designed to help minimize damage, and attempting to minimize the extent to which the highest risk areas are populated. Many of the city's flood management program elements are based on the requirements and guidance of the National Flood Insurance Program (NFIP). As an insurance provider, the NFIP's primary focus is on minimizing impacts to structures. Recognizing that the nature of our flood hazards also presents substantial risk to life safety, the City of Boulder adopted the high hazard zone regulations in 1989 to supplement existing regulations intended to protect structures. While the high hazard zone limits are delineated based on areas where people are likely to be swept away by floodwaters, life safety protection is implemented through restrictions on structures and parking where people arc likely to be at risk. The high hazard zone regulations place restrictions on existing and proposed structures intended for human occupancy, prohibit substantially damaged structures intended for human occupancy from being rebuilt after a flood, and outline a process through which those property owners can petition the city to purchase their property after a flood event. At the Sept. 18 City Council meeting, two community members voiced concerns about the high hazard flood regulations during the Boulder Creek Floodplain Mapping update and requested a review of the regulations. This memorandum presents information about the history and objectives of the city's high hazard regulations; how the high hazard zone is implemented and its post-flood implications. At its Dec. 17 meeting, the WRA13 will be making a recommendation to City Council for the 2013 Work Program priorities. This memorandum is intended to provide the WRAB with background information that may be helpful in determining whether a review of the high hazard zone regulations is a priority, and if so, what the scope of such a review might include Public Comment: 19:04 p.m.] David Leserman: Mr. Leserman is one of the community members that brought this item to the board's attention. Mr. Leserman's property is primarily located in the Iligh Hazard Zone. He believes there is currently an inequity in the code (9-3-8 13), as he would not be allowed to rebuild hollowing a flood event, and thus his land would then be worthless. Fie indicated that it is not lair fin- the landowner to have such a financial burden by the city's law stating that the city could purchase the land at a post flood cost. The framers of the city ordinance did not take into consideration the economic burden to the property owner. Mr. Leserman would like WRAB to suggest to the City Council to take a look at the policy and see if they believe it needs to be adjusted. Oliver Bousse: The IIIIZ just bisects his dwelling, but still covers a portion of his land. If the 111IZ is touching any portion of the property, than the entire property is subject to loosing the ability to build a dwelling on it. Staff interjected at this point to inform Mr. Bousse that his information is incorrect. Only the portion of the property that lies within the HFIZ would be undevelopable, not the property in its entirety. WRAB Discussion Included: 19:16 p.m.] • The board asked many clarifying questions to better grasp the ordinance as it currently stands. • The board decided that there is not an issue to pursue at this time, however if any board member determines there might be something to discuss, the board will discuss this issue further at the December WRAB meeting as they work on their letter to City Council. Agenda Item 7 - Matters 110:00 p.m.] From the Board: • Discussion of the 2013 Council Retreat Questions for Boards and Commissions 13oard members will send their top three priorities to the board secretary to compile and the board secretary will cotlate and send out the responses to the Board. • Retreat Follow-up - Discussion of operating agreements and potential bylaw amendments From Staff: 110:49 p.m.] • UV at the WWTF - plans to go live sometime in December. + CU reuse - the city received a response from CU in response to their communication with the state. WItAB Minutes 19 November 2012 fate No- 3 • Usg of PVC water pipe - staff has put some information together in response to some community inquiries about the use of PVC pipe in the city's distribution infrastructure. Agenda Item S- Discussion on Future Schedule 110:35 p.m.1 Agenda Item 9-Adjournment 110:57 p.m.] There being no further business to come before the Board at this time, by motion regularly adopted, the meeting was adjourned at 10:57 p.m. Motion to adjourn by: Johnson; Seconded by: Scharnhorst Motion Passes 3:0 Date, Time, and Location of Next Meeting: The next WRAB meeting will be Monday, 17 December 2012 at 7:00 p.m., in the 1777 West Conference Room of the city Municipal Building located at 1777 Broadway, unless otherwise decided by staff and the Board. APPROVED BY: A"I TESTED BY: Board Chair Board Secretary Datc Date An audio recording of the full meeting for which these minutes are a summary, is available on the Water Resources Advisory Board web page. WRAB Minutes I November 2012 Paue No. 4 WATER RESOURCES ADVISORY BOARD Upcoming Agenda Items - All Items 't'entative Revised 12-10-2012 January 28, 2013 (Rescheduled due to Holiday) • Information Item - Water Supply Status/2012 Drought Response Debrief (Crean) • Information Item - Boulder Reservoir ANS/Boulder Reservoir Master Plan Follow IJp - (Wind/Parks & Recreation) • Action Item - Recommendation on Critical Facilities Ordinance (Coleman) • Information Item - 2013 City Council Priorities/Council Retreat Summary (Arthur) February 25, (Rescheduled due to Holiday) • Information Item - Hydroelectric Program Operations/Opportunities (Taddeucci) • South Boulder Creek Flood Mitigation Study (Bauer) • Information Item - Discussion of flood safety outreach efforts (Jacobson/Rosato) March 18, 2013 • Action Item - Commercial/Industrial/Institutional Water Budgets (Sands) • Information Item - Water Conservation Futures Study • Last Meeting for Susan lott April 15, 2013 • New WRAB member/Election of Officers • WRAB Retreat Scoping • Information Item - 2014 Budget Process Overview May 20, 2013 • WRAB Retreat Follow Up • Information Item - 2014 Capital fmprovcmcnts Program June 17, 2013 • Action Item - Recommendation on 2014 Capital Improvements Program July 15, 2013 • Action Item - Water Conservation Futures Study tJncominz Items/Not Scheduled • Fluoride in drinking water (Linenfelser/Crittenden) • Public Works Design and Construction Standards (SchLim) • Update on Partnership for Clean Water (Emarine) • Skunk Creek Flood Mapping Update (Coleman) • Upper Goose Creek/Two Mile Canyon Creek Flood Mapping Update (Noble/Bauer) • Boulder Slough Flood Mapping Update (Coleman) • Backflow Prevention Program (Leoni) • Utility Revenue Stabilization (Baird/Sands) • Technology and Benchmarks (Crittenden/Douville/Crean/Harberg/Gallo) • Boulder Creek E-coli TMDL Implementation Plan/Vast Marine Street BMP Implementation (Scott) • Water Supply/Climate Change (Taddeucci) • WWTF Activated Sludge Upgrade/Removal of Emerging Contaminants (Linenfelser/Douville) • Update on Civic Area Planning Process • W WTF - Tour of facility upgrades - April 2013 (Douville) City Council Goals - 2012 Top Priorities: 1. Boulder's Energy Future The top priority for the City in 2012 is the development of a framework for planning the energy future for the city of Boulder. This framework will focus on the idea of localization, the overarching goal of which is: To ensure that Boulder residents, businesses and institutions have access to energy that is increasingly clean, reliable and competitively priced. 2. Climate Action Plan Outline the next generation of climate action efforts in Boulder Consider extension of CAP tax 3. Affordable Housing Receive report of the Task force created in 2010 to evaluate goals and the approach to affordable housing and Based on Council review and discussion of these recommendations, develop an action plan to improve the availability of affordable housing in the city Consider policies regarding inclusionary housing for rental units 4. Civic Center Master Plan Study and develop a master plan for the area between 15th and 9th Streets, with a focus on Farmer's Market and area between Broadwav and 15th Street. Next Tier Priorities: 1. University Hill Revitalization Continue work of Ownership Group to develop comprehensive revitalization strategy Investigate formation of a general improvement district, including the commercial area and part bf the residential area to control trash and other problems Change boundaries of BMS land use to coincide with TRIGID through BVCP process Support private development and investment in Hill area Partner with CU to consider opportunities for properties in the Hill area Provide an opportunity to explore big ideas 2. Homelessness Participate in Ten Year Plan to Address Homelessness Balance long term and short term approaches to address needs Invest new resources in Housing First model Work with partners, such as 130110, to address approaches to immediate needs 3. Boulder Junction Implementation Work with RTD and selected developer of site to maximize mixed use urban center Invest in planned infrastructure Achieve goals of plan while ensuring flexibility in working with developers Prioritize city actions to facilitate private investment Focus additional planning work on reconsidering use for Pollard site r City Council 2012 Work Plan by Council Goal TOP PRIORITIES :r 2012 - 3rd Quarter 2012 - 4th Quarter j 2013 - 1st Quarter 2013 - 2nd Quarter ■ Boulder's Energy Future - ongoing Boulder's Energy Future - Boulder's Energy Future - Boulder's Energy Future - ongoing analysis of municipalization and ongoing analysis of ongoing analysis of analysis of municipalization and work on Energy Action Plan with municipalization and work on municipalization and work on work on Energy Action Plan with updates to council at roundtables Energy Action Plan with Energy Action Plan with updates updates to council at roundtables and July 24 study session updates to council at to council at roundtables and and study session (TBD) roundtables and Oct. 23 study study session (TBD) session GOAL: Climate Action Plan 2012 - 3rd Quarter 2012 - 4th Quarter 2013 - 1st Quarter 2013 - 2nd Quarter ■ Climate Action Framework - draft Climate Action Framework - CEES - ongoing work on Phase 2 • CEES - potential ordinance five-year goals and annual targets; draft five-year goals and annual ordinance options; direction on adoption for Phase 2 integration with master plans; and targets; integration with master preferred option from Council (benchmarking and disclosure) development of tracking and plans; and development of (TBD) (date TBD) reporting tools with updates and tracking and reporting tools Climate Action Framework: ■ Climate Action Framework: council feedback at roundtables and with updates and council tracking and reporting tools; tracking and reporting tools; July 24 study session feedback at roundtables and launch of 2013 program priorities; delivery of 2013 program priorities; ■ CAP Tax- consideration of ballot Oct. 23 study session updates at roundtables and study updates to council at roundtables language (August) CAP Tax - potential voter session (TBD) and study session (date TBD) ■ Electric! Hybrid vehicles (1P) consideration in November; ■ Electric! Hybrid vehicles -project finalize 2013 work plan based closeout on ballot outcome • CEES - stakeholder engagement; Phase 2 options and update at Oct. 23 study session • Solar Energy code changes ■ Energy Conservation and Efficiency Program for Existing Commercial Buildin,s - study E session ■ Energy Performance Contract - Phase 3 ■ Green Building and Green Points Program amendments: 2012 ICC Building, fire, Wildland-Urban Interface, Energy Codes ■ Wind generation code changes GOAL: Affordable Housing 2012-3rd Quarter 2012 - 4th Quarter 2013 - 1st Quarter 2013 - 2nd Quarter ■ Inclusionary Housing: development ■ Inclusionary Housing: options ■ Mobile Homes Parks - legislative ■ Inclusionary Housing Regulations of off-site criteria for integration of affordable agenda Update depending on Council ■ Analysis of TOD Fund housing units ■ Inclusionary Housing Rental direction ■ Inclusionary Housing: Rental Policy Ordinance depending on policy options Council direction GOAL: Civic Center Master Plan 2012 - 3rd Quarter 2012 - 4th Ouarter I 2013 - t st Quarter 2013 - 2nd Ouarter ■ Feedback on city space study, flood ■ Council adopts guiding Council provides feedback on Draft plan development and issues and ideas competition criteria principles initial options (January 20) community input (July 31 study session) ■ Community generates Board and community input Council study session on drag plan ■ Community generates ideals for preliminary concepts; ideas Council adopts preferred option(s) Municipal Space Study Final civic center vision and guiding competition for local and and strategies (March) Report principles national teams r.~ f,. NEXT TIER PRIORITIES / ' i 2012 - 3rd Quarter 2012 - 4th Quarter Z013 -1st Quarter 2013 - 2nd Quarter ■ University Hill strategy - update ■ University Hill strategy - update - 2013 action priorities confirmed Hill Residential Service District - ■ Hill Residential Service District (IP) ■ Hill Residential Service District by Council at January retreat I" reading of petition - check in on final proposal Action on other priorities (TBD) i ig i 2012 - 3rd Quarter 2012 - 4th Quarter 2013 - Ist Quarter 2013 - 2nd Quarter ■ 10-year Plan update (I P) ■ Direction from Council priorities Work plan check in and priority - ■ Update on Homeless Action Plan ■ Action Plan to address homeless on homeless issues (from Council retreat (service providers) issues (Service provider plan to Homeless issues study session) develop coordinated outreach and for scoping for workplan case management in Boulder) ■ Homelessness Issues Study ■ Housing First- 1175 Lee HiII Road: Session update on management plan and MOU / Boulder Junction Implementation 2012 - 3rd Quarter 2012 - 4th Quarter 2013 - 1st Quarter 2013 - 2nd Quarter • Update on TVAP implementation: Update on potential policy ■ TDM District hnplementation Update on potential policy issues check-in on city owned site vision issues related to key public Update (IP) related to key public improvements and options; and discussion of improvements ■ Update on potential policy issues and city owned site (as needed) policy issues related to key public related to key public improvements; as needed (July 31 improvements and city owned site Study Session (as needed) ■ TD t' Parking Access GID budget- consideration OTHER GOAL: Other City Goals and-Work Plan Items 2012 - 3rd Quarter 2012 - 4th Quarter 2013 -1st Quarter 2013 - 2nd Quarter ■ Acquisition plan update (OSMP) ■ Bike parking ordinance updates 28"" Street Multi-use Path and ■ Baseline Underpass East of • Annexation and site review • Capital Investment Strategy Bikeable Shoulders Iris to Broadway CEAP - Call up c Boulder Jewish Commons Round I - implementation update Yarmouth CEAP Call up • Floodplain Management including (Arapahoe and Cherryvale) ■ Carter Lake Pipeline - CEAP Capital Investment Strategy Boulder Creek Mapping, South c Hogan Pancost Chautauqua Parking Data Round 1- implementation update Boulder Creek Mitigation, and ■ Barker Reservoir Boating Collection and Assessment - Contractor licensing Critical Facilities • Capital Investment Strategy Round 1 check in Cultural Master Plan ■ OSMP natural resources- - implementation update ■ Code changes DUHMD/ PS assessment update overarching policy issues ■ Chautauqua Stewardship o Pearl Street Mall - permits 0P) o Temporal Regulations Framework: draft principles for and leases Economic Sustainable Strategy - o Penalties for violations CCA lease ■ Disposable Bag ordinance policy recommendations (study o Multi-modal access and parkin; ■ Civic Use Task Force ■ Education Excise Tax - process session) opportunities o Update on recommendations and for allocation of remaining Floodplain Management including o Analysis of trail network and next steps funds Boulder Creek Mapping, South distribution of activities ■ City Property leases (IP) ■ Floodplain Management Boulder Creek Mitigation, and ■ Parks and Recreation Master Plan ■ Code changes including Boulder Creek Critical Facilities ■ Police Department Master Plan c Alcohol/ Land Use Mapping, South Boulder Creek ■ Smoking Ban on Pearl Street Mall • Smoking Ban Oil Pearl Street Mall e Congregate care Mitigation, and Critical (Pilot) - implementation (Pilot) - analysis and e Community gardens Facilities ■ State of the Court Presentation recommendation ■ CU East Campus coordination - ■ NPP commuter permit - sunset ■ Take out container waste ■ TMP Update- additional direction update • OSMP natural resources- reduction ordinance ■ Water supply status ■ Disposable Bag Reduction overarching policy issues ■ Transportation Funding (SS) ordinance . Pearl Parkway Multi-use Path ■ TMP Update - additional • Economic Sustainability Strategy - 30`h Street to Foothills CEAP direction phase one study on primary Call up ■ US36 Bike\vay Maintenance - employers (study session) • Public works design and Enhancements IGA (tentative • Education Excise Tax- process for construction standards - update based on if extra community allocation of remaining funds ■ Randolph Center Condominium investments are desired) ■ Evolution of Access and Parking Declaration • Zero Waste Master Plan Update Management Strategics ■ Smoking Ban on Pearl Street (DUHMD/PS) Mall (Pilot) -ordinance o IP • Sustainability indicators o Formation of staff and community • Sustainable streets and centers: work groups typology framework and 4 .1~lv' L o Disseminate RFQ's for Project direction on next steps Consultant a Takeout container waste ■ Highway 93 over/underpass IGA reduction - policy direction ■ IBM Connector Trail IGA • Transportation Funding • Mall Events update (IP) (direction) ■ Municipal Building Improvements ■ Urban wildlife - prairie dog (update) policy and ordinance revisions • OSMP trail around city (IP) • Valmont Butte Site • Smoking Ban on Pearl Street Mall ■ Zero Waste Master Plan Update (Pilot) - public process Management and Remediation ■ Stormwater Ordinance Update (IP) • Stormwater Management IGA - Keep it Clean Partnership ■ Transportation Funding (IP) ■ TMP update - assessment, check in/ refinement policy focus areas • US36 Bikeway Maintenance IGA ■ Valmont Butte Site Management and Remediation (IP) ■ Water supply status KEY BMEA Boulder Municipal Employees Association BVCP Boulder Valley Comprehensive Plan CAGID Central Area General Lnoroaement District CEAP Community and Environmental Assessment Process CAP Climate Action Plan Cl: University of Colorado DUHMDTS Dovntovwn and University Hill Management District' Parking Services (City Division) GID General Improvement District ]CC International Code Council IGA Intergovernmental Agreement 1P Information Packet mou Memorandum ofUnderstandin NPP Neighborhood Parking Permit Program OSMP Open SpacciDRountain Parks Department RFO Request for Qualitications RH Residential Housing TDM Trans ortation Demand Management TMP Transportation Master Plan 1 CITY OF BOULDER INFORMATION ITEM FOR: TRANSPORTATION ADVISORY BOARD - Dcc. 3, 2012 OPEN SPACE BOARD OF TRUSTEES - Dec. 12, 2012 PLANNING BOARD -Dec. 13, 2012 ENVIRONMENTAL ADVISORY BOARD - Dec. 13, 2012 WATER RESOURCES ADVISORY BOARD - Dec. 17, 2012 PARKS AND RECREATION ADVISORY BOARD - Dec. .17, 2012 GREENWAYS ADVISORY COMMITTEE AGENDA ITEM MEETING DATE: Jan. 10, 2012 SUBJECT: Draft CEAP for Wonderland Creek Greenways Improvements from Diagonal Highway to Windin Trail REQUESTING DEPARTMENT: Anne Noble - Greenways Coordinator Kurt Bauer - Engineering Project Manager Utilities Division Marni Ratzel -Transportation Planner II PURPOSE: A summary of the draft CEAP is being provided to board members as an information item. It is requested you review the full CEAP available on the Greenways webpagc under "Current Greenways Projects and Opportunities" and forward any comments or concerns regarding the draft CEAP to your Greenways Advisory Committee representative. If you have questions on this material, please contact Kurt Bauer at 303-441-4232 or BauerKiU bouldercolorado.i,zov. The full CEAP is available at: Bouldercolorado.gov > City A-Z > G > Greenways Program > Current Greenways Projects and Opportunities > Wonderland Creek (Diagonal Highway to Winding Trail) CEAP > CEAP GREENWAYS ADVISORY COMMITTEE ACTION REQUESTED: A recommendation from the Greenways Advisory Committee to City Council concerning the CEAP for the Wonderland Creek Greenways Improvements from Diagonal I lighway to Winding Trail is requested. Pending GAC approval, City Council will receive the CEAP as a call up item in early 2013. Attached is the Executive Summary ti-om the Wonderland Creek Greenways Improvements from Diagonal Highway to Winding Trail CEAP along with a figure summarizing the proposed recommendations. WONDERLAND CREEK GREENWAYS IMPROVEMENT PROJECT DIAGONAL HIGHWAY TO WINDING TRAIL EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The Wonderland Creek project extends from Winding Trail in the north to the Diagonal Highway in the south. The purpose of the project is to provide flood mitigation and improved trail connections in the project reach including a pedestrian and bicycle underpass at 28`h Street. The existing 100-year floodplain along the project reach extends far beyond the creek banks, particularly on the south and west side of the channel, and includes numerous structures. One structure (2800 Kalmia) is located within the existing High Hazard Zone. A flood mitigation master plan completed in 2009 recommends this reach as a high priority for flood improvements. A multi-use path exists along Wonderland Creek from 26"' Street to 30th Street including an underpass at the Diagonal Highway. An underpass does not currently exist at 28"' Street. The Greenways Master Plan and Transportation Master Plan show a proposed pedestrian and bicycle underpass at Wonderland Creek and 28th Street. A CEAP was approved in Oct. 2010 for the reach just downstream. The project will extend a multi-use path from Foothills Parkway to 30th Street. This project is currently under design and is anticipated to be constructed in 2015. Project alternatives fall into two categories, flood improvements and trail connections. Three flood mitigation alternatives are presented. The first flood mitigation alternative (Fl) would make improvements to contain the High Hazard Zone (defined by the city as the drainage area where depth and velocity pose a threat to life and safety) and is estimated to cost $4.2 million to design and construct. This alternative would result in one structure no longer being located in the High Hazard Zone and 16 structures no longer located in the 100-year floodplain (293 dwelling units). The second flood mitigation alternative (F2) would provide 100-year flood flow containment and eliminate the flood risk for 100 structures (338 dwelling units) at a cost of $5.42 million. Both flood mitigation alternatives would result in similar impacts to the riparian area. The third alternative was developed to minimize disruption of the riparian area between Kalmia Avenue and the Diagonal Highway. It is similar to F2 from Winding Trail to Kalmia Avenue but would include construction of a high flow bypass pipeline between Kalmia Avenue and the Diagonal Highway. The 32 feet wide by five feet high pipeline would convey flows that exceed the existing channel capacity in this reach. Construction of the pipeline culvert would avoid impacts to this reach of the open channel but would require acquisition of easements, significant construction impacts to multi-family access roads and parking and relocation of utilities. The cost of this alternative is $7.5 million. The two trail connection alternatives are nearly identical with the exception that the first alternative (TI) would maintain the existing at-grade crossing of Kalmia Avenue. The second alternative (`l'2) would provide a pedestrian and bicycle underpass crossing of Kalmia Avenue. The second alternative is estimated to cost an additional $203,000 if coupled with the High Hazard Containment flood mitigation alternative, $60,000 if coupled with the 100-year Containment alternative and $395,000 if coupled with the high flow bypass flood mitigation alternative. The staff recommendation is the I00-year Containment flood mitigation alternative (F2) and Kalmia Underpass (T2) alternative. The 100-year Containment alternative would provide greater flood protection by limiting the 100-year event flows to the main channel, removing 100 structures (338 dwelling units) from the floodplain designation. The Kalmia Underpass alternative would provide a grade-separated crossing at Kalmia Avenue, reducing pedestrian and bicycle conflicts with vehicular traffic. Total estimated design and construction cost of the recommended alternatives is $5.48 million. Completed comments from the Oct. 11, 2012 open house indicate a preference (12-3) for these alternatives. It is, however, recognized that construction of either of the flood mitigation alternatives would result in substantial impacts to the riparian area, particularly between the Diagonal Highway and Kalmia Avenue. As a result, every effort will be made during the design phase to minimize impacts to the existing riparian area and provide mitigation including a careful evaluation to save trees and replanting lost vegetation with native species. The city was awarded a Transportation Improvement Program (TIP) grant for $900,000 and the Urban Drainage and Flood Control District (UDFCD) has currently committed $250,000. Funding is shown in the Greenways and Flood Utilities CIP for years 2013 to 2015 totaling $5,465,000 for this project reach. Summary of Recommended Alternatives Culvert replacement • , t - ' t r yy 6 ••-z t. f''r: M - . s"y^a ~2~.T 4; . { 4 1 - R • • r~ 10; Construct pedestrian T11 J~ f•~-", - underpass with low - flow trail crossing ~t eY S t, r ~~yYl, x•11 S ti Y .rte'- - 4 A t ..'.y t n• f f Construct 9' deep ' Existing Culvert overflow channel with 5 drop structures "4 s 1177 Construct pedestrian and bicycle underpass i ~ ~i~ f:C~, _ •eJ u ' e: r y,,is - 'k s.k• r' ~ . tf t ~S l ~a~ a r 4 Crossing replacements d New Trail Segments • = 16 Existing Trail Segments a 4 y V-11 . ( Upgraded Crossings ,`°JeR* a _ y .h~~ b - e ` Aft Spaef~• A~"' Channel Work ~ ~ ~ } - ~ y~ ~ A k~ fall + ; ~•*'1s : ~ , _ . 1~,'~,•.+"ft+~s-'~• r ;.r'-y'Yl~. - a 9. .1 y~' ~ { •t" OTT' ~_4. t •F'~ - 7. • Role of WRAB Officers The Water Resources Advisory Board (WRAB) has three officers, the Chair, the Vice- Chair, and the Secretary. The WRAB voted to get rid of the Secretary in light of the fact that we have a permanent staff person taking minutes for the board. The WRAB decided the role of the Chair should include the following: (1) The Chair will lead meetings and follow the set agenda using Roberts Rules. (2) The Chair will meet with the Utilities Director to set the agenda ahead of time and discuss any issues that come up related to WRAB preparation, documents, speaker attendance, changes, or other agenda items. (3) The Director and Chair will set the agenda based on the Director's sense of what is ready to present to the WRAB and take to City Council. The board will provide input on agenda items at the end of each meeting for the next several meetings. Issues can change and be added at the last moment based on the Director's judgment. (4) The Chair will ensure that public hearing rules are followed (see operational agreements). (5) The Chair can call members of the board ahead of meetings to assess the needs of the members for documents or other preparation. The Chair can also ask if there are unmet needs or problems that members are having with meetings. (6) The Chair will seek to ensure that all members of the board have been heard and have provided an opportunity to make their views known on each topic. (7) The Chair will meet with the incoming Chair to review the previous year's results and share any upcoming information. (8) The Chair and Vice-Chair will meet jointly with the Director during the last month or two to allow for a transition from old to new chair. Vice-Chair (1) The Vice-Chair will stand in to manage meetings for the Chair. (2) The Vice-Chair will provide assistance to the Chair in organizing and counting votes, assuring public participation occurs fairly, and other meeting procedural matters. (3) The Vice-Chair will meet with the Chair and the Director of Utilities one or two months before assuming the role to ensure a smooth transition to the position. Member Responsibilities (1) When addressing City Council or other groups on WRAB matters, a member must clearly state whether the position being presented represents the WRAB position or the individual's position. The member must represent the views of WRAB accurately, including minority positions. (2) When addressing City Council or other groups on non-WRAB matters, the member must clearly state that the, Sarre 1o speaking on behalf of WRAB. (3) When bringing issues before the baa 13 el fibers must not take an advocacy position for that-gFottp. If they hold that position, they should clearly state their relationship to the trla-nnd if necessary, recues themselves on votes if a conflict of interest is present. (4) When discussing issues with the public or outside groups, the member will be clear about WRAB positions. (5) Members will use email protocols (provided by Tom) Operational Agreements (1) The WRAB agenda will be reviews at the end of each meeting and will be finally set by the Director of Utilities and the Chair, depending on staff workload, readiness of memos, public notice, and other factors. (2) Agendas will contain three to four issues only one of which will require a public hearing. (3) Public hearing will occur at the beginning of the meeting for non-noticed issues; during the issue discussion for noticed issues. (4) Public discussion will be limited to 3 minutes unless the board agrees to allow the speakers to take longer. (5) Time will be kept by the Secretary. (6) A member of the board can request that more time be provided and the board will indicate with a voice count or head count their approval. (7) The Chair will seek to include all members in discussion of topics, but each board member will take responsibility for participating in discussions, making his or her concerns or disagreements known during discussion, and clarifying any questions they have. (8) Board members will take responsibility to check in with the Chair or Director for clarification when necessary. They can call ahead of meetings. If information needs to be shared with all members, we will follow the normal email protocol from the Secretary of the Board. (9) The Board will utilize tools to show the extent of interest in new topics raised by members of the public or the board. We will utilize a simple majority vote of members to determine if a matter is of sufficient interest to have staff pursue basic background information to bring to the board for discussion. The board will use a similar method for taking an issue further and requiring more staff work. A matter must be of sufficient board interest to be put on future agendas in more than an update/matter capacity. (10) The Board will also determine how deeply to pursue a matter, whether background information is sufficient, or whether further staff work is needed. (11) Members will articulate questions, opinions, comments, and reasons for votes succinctly. (12) Members will exercise self-discipline by avoiding repeating statements of others, being verbose, or straying off topic. (13) Members will allow the presiding officer to manage the meeting and call on members before speaking. (14) Members will support the presiding officer in enforcement of these rules. (15) Members will permit other members an opportunity so speak once on an issue before speaking a second time on the same issue. (16) Members will focus on the issue being discussed KatDzeflt~ c#ts gree+r~eN of idea by_ d avoiding personal attacks or assuming motives of another. (17) Members will consider adopted council goals, staff work plans, and limited resources when making requests for delay or additional information. (18) Members will acknowledge that new topics raised during a meeting by a member of the public or of the board will not have the benefit of all the necessary background information, may not be presented from a balanced perspective, and decisions in such situations are more often emotionally driven. New topics raised during a meeting are most often best resolved by deferring the decision to a future meeting. BYLAWS CITY OF BOULDER WATER RESOURCES ADVISORY BOARD ARTICLE I GENERAL MATTERS Section 1.1 Board Composition. The Board shall comprise the five (5) members appointed by the City Council pursuant to the City Charter and applicable ordinance. It at any time a the li ;:rd re cr i; ror !-,k* r.:I,, 11u 'r% l'1.1pi,' 4id! Ill! ;in•. '11( 1) . 1i:u1:'. her 11,. L, r_•;n,~iir.icr ,--f ins I,: r~tl Section 1.2 Board Officers. The members of the Board shall have officers elected from its members. The officers shall consist of Chair, Vice Chair, and a Secretary. Remaining Board members shall serve as Assistant Secretaries. l'hc Recording Ssecretary shall be a City employee, but shall not be considered a Board officer. Section 1.3 Board Elections. The officers shall be elected by the Board at its fast regular meeting after annual appointments have been made by the City Council. Terms of office shall be for one year or until replacements have been qualified. If, at any time an officer of the Board resigns, or by reason of disability becomes unable to serve as an officer of the Board, 1}ut is othcl~%i~. Mill : urcmhcr of the board.. then the of I L;r vacancy caused thereby, shall be filled by :iiiother member of the Board by a majority vote of the remaining Board members. Any off icr: vacancy appointment shall be for the remainder of the unexpired term. Section 1.4 Board Responsibilities. The Board shall exercise those functions specified by City Charter, and applicable ordinances. Specifically included responsibilities include advising the City Manager, Planning Board, and City Council on the following utilities matters: I . To review all city utilities environmental assessments and capital improvements. 2. To review, monitor and propose changes to the city's raw water, treated water, wastewater, and flood control master plans. 3. To review and provide recommendations to the city manager concerning policy issues on operating programs, including without limitation water conservation, water treatment plant residuals, wastewater treatment plant biosolids disposal, and water quality. Section 1.5 Regular Board Meetings. Regular meetings of the Board shall be held at such time and date as determined by the majority of the Board at a location as the Board shall from time to time designate. The Board has scheduled regular meetings at 7:00 prn on the third Monday of each month, at a location to be duly noticed. I Appreved 4 18 2011 i Section 1.6 Special Board Meetings. Special meetings of the Board may be called by any member of the Board by informing the other members and Utilities Division staff liaison of the time and place of such meeting and obtaining consent of a Board quorum for the special meeting. Section 1.7 Meeting Notices. Notices of regular meetings and special meetings shall be published in a manner similar to notices of other City boards and commissions as prescribed by City Council. Notices of all regular and special meetings shall be posted in conformance with applicable law. Board members shall have no less than twenty four hours notice of any meeting. ARTICLE II BOARD MEETING ORDER OF BUSINESS Section 2.1 Order of Business. At all regular meetings of the Board, the following shall be the order of business: A) Call to Order B) Approval of minutes C) OpcnRW l - Comment L) 1 AL! NJ! l~ rr• ; +,~1 1°uhl~, i fc:+ru!~~_ EB) Matters from Board Members FE) Matters from City Staff F) A ~ endR kews arm G) Discussion of next meeting agenda H) Adjournment The above order of business may be amended upon motion passed by the majority of the members of the Board in attendance at any meeting. ARTICLE III CONDUCT OF BOARD MEETINGS Section 3.1 Board Business. All business of the Board shall be conducted only during properly constituted regular or special meetings and all such meetings shall be open to the public These Bylaws have been adopted in substitution of Roberts Rules of Order. Roberts Rules of Order may be invoked at the discretion of a majority of the quorum present, where not inconsistent with these bylaws, but shall not automatically apply at meetings of the Board. Three members of the Board in attendance at all meetings shall constitute a quorum for the transaction of business. No action of the Board shall be valid without an affirmative vote of three members. Section 3.2 Agenda Management. The Chair shall manage each regular and special meeting in a manner appropriate to complete the Board's business scheduled for the meeting to the extent possible. In the absence of objection by a majority of the quorum present, the Chair may limit 2 the length of discussion on any agenda item by Board members and members of the public. For agenda items for which no formal hearing is required, public comment may be permitted by the Chair at the beginning of discussion on the particular agenda item. Once interested members of the public have commented, the Chair shall restrict subsequent discussion on the agenda item to Board members and staff, unless a majority of the quorum present votes to open discussion to other persons present. Section 3.3 Hearing Management. The Chair shall manage all hearings in a manner to provide each citizen meaningful participation in the hearing process, without partiality. The Chair may limit the length of public comments for purposes of allowing all interested speakers an equal opportunity to comment within the time frame set aside for the hearing. Unless otherwise specified at the hearing, individual public comment shall be limited to not more than three minutes. Public testimony at hearings shall follow staff presentation of the proposal under consideration. Board members may ask questions of witnesses to seek clarification of the witness' position, but are discouraged from engaging in substantive debate with witnesses. Board discussion and deliberations shall follow public testimony. Hearings may be continued by majority vote of the Board. ARTICLE IV MTNUTES/INFORMATIONAL PACKAGES Section 4,1 Action& +ry Form Minutes. ] hc_-R~~c}nlm - 5ccrL~1,11~ Loot' _'o-flon Formatted. ttighnght i l m m1111ocs, unlC,;s :1114ol r roil of 11111-it.., i, tC1111C cd by the C'in 19an_±C1 W it` Ci+tincil. - Copies of actionstiimiiary form minutes of regular and special meetings shall be distributed by Utilities Division staff to City Council within 10 days after each meeting is held to the extent possible. rlio!1~~ form minutes shall be produced by Utilities Division staff with Board review, and shall be considered as the formal record of proceedings of the Board. 'ut ui i+3 + form minutes shall be furnished to each Board member prior to the next regular Board meeting, as specified in section 4.2 of these Bylaws. Section 4.2 Board Informational Packages. Prior to each regular meeting and each special meeting scheduled sufficiently in advance, Utilities Division staff shall assemble and disseminate to Board members an informational package consisting of action u+rmafy minutes to be approved at the next meeting, other information that the Utilities Division staff liaison deems appropriate for Board consideration at the next meeting, and information otherwise useful to the Board and reasonably requested by the Board. Delivery of the package to the Board shall be calculated to provide a reasonable time to review the material prior to the next Board meeting. ARTICLE V DUTIES OF OFFICERS Section 5.1 Chair's Duties. It shall be the duty of the Chair to (a) preside over all meetings of the Board; (b) sign all minutes, resolutions and other documents on behalf of the Board; (c) coordinate with the Utilities Division liaison on agenda items; and (d) subject to the advice, order 3 Approved 4-18 1-1 or ratification by the Board, discharge such other duties as may be required of the Chair by City Council and City staff, pursuant to the City Charter and applicable ordinance. Section 5.2 Vice Chair Duties. It shall be the duty of the Vice Chair to (a) perform all such duties and functions of the Chair in the absence of the Chair, (b) to assist the Chair in the performance of his/her duties. Section 5.3 Secretary Duties. The Secretary shall attest to the signature of the Chair on all documents signed by the Chair. e:kccht r,r mzeettn_ i:.imute -h:rsl he :1 L'.-6 its by tt"c Recordine Secretary. Any document signed by the Chair, attested to by the Secretary shall be deemed an official document of the Board. The Secretary has no added responsibility for production of summary form as those functions shall be performed by the Ra ordine Secretary or other designated Utilities Division staff. Section 5.4 Assistant Secretary Duties. An Assistant Secretary shall perform the function of the Secretary in the absence of the Secretary. The Chair or Vice Chair acting as Chair may not attest his/her own signature. ARTICLE VI PUBLIC INSPECTION OF DOCUMENTS Section 6.1 Inspection of Documents. Records of all Board proceedings, and minutes of all meetings, shall be open to inspection by the general public during reasonable business hours. ARTICLE VII AMENDMENTS Section 7.1 Amendments to Bylaws. These Bylaws may be changed, amended or revoked by an affirmative vote of three Board members at any regular meeting of the Board, or at any special meeting called for that purpose, n o i__ -l_illat sutfgcni written natice cad ;,r,h Cl}:emLC. mricrrtih~rcnr ru i•-ti::~~,+ti~,n h,. LSC~ti ,~r.cm lu all irenibcr iii ad4ancc ofam re~-,irlau or special meeting. - - Approved and adopted this _=-mli- day of -%+*4, 201-'+- CITY OF BOULDER WATER RESOURCES ADVISORY BOARD Chair 4 I ATTEST: By; A Secretary 5 CITY OF BOULDER WATER RESOURCES ADVISORY BOARD AGENDA ITEM MEETING DATE: December 17, 2012 AGENDA TITLE: Public Hearing and consideration ofa motion recommending that City Council adopt an updated Intergovernmental Agreement for participation in the Kee it Clean Partnership PRESENTE RIS: Jeff Arthur, Director of Public Works for Utilities Bret Linenfelser, Water Quality and Environmental Services Coordinator Donna Scott, Stormwater Quality Program Supervisor EXECUTIVE, SUMMARY: The Keep it Clean Partnership (KICP) is a regional stormwater quality management program serving the communities of Boulder, Longmont, Louisville, Lafayette, Erie, Superior, and Boulder County. The program's primary goal is to comply with the federal and state municipal stormwater regulations and to address broader water quality and watershed issues in the Boulder Creek and Saint Vrain watersheds. A description of the KICP can be found at www.keepitcleanpartnership.org The KICP Plan Intergovernmental Agreement (IGA) outlines the program management structure and cost sharing method to implement required KICP programs. The IGA designates a steering committee as an official management and oversight body to approve programs and corresponding annual budgets. One representative from each of the participating communities is designated as a voting member of the committee. The KICP Plan IGA was first adopted in 2001 with a five year term, and has been updated every five years. The current IGA will expire in March 2013. This latest update will extend the agreement with only two significant changes, which include: (1) cost sharing based on population according to the latest census data (previous IGA's referenced a specific census date); and (2) eliminating the five year term of the IGA to allow flexibility in responding to regulatory changes, permit requirements, and/or response to requested changes by a Partner community. The KICP budget is developed annually and will continue to require annual adoption from each member community under a separate agreement. City staff is requesting that the Water Resources Advisoiy Board (WRAB) recommend that City Council approve, in substantially the same form, the Intergovernmental AGENDA ITEM # V PAGE 1 Agreement fi)r Implementation of the Keep it Clean Partnership Plan, dated March 9, 2013 (Attachment A). COUNCIL FILTER IMPACTS: Economic: The objective of the KICP is to use a collaborative approach in creating cost- effective solutions to implement a regional stormwater management program. This approach not only aids in reduced cost for compliance with regulations, but also helps leverage resources to address broader water quality and watershed issues. Environmental: The KICP outlines goals and programs to address water quality protection in the Boulder Creek and St. Vrain Creek watersheds. The KICP promotes the protection of water quality on a watershed basis, as called for in the Boulder Valley Comprehensive Plan. In 2006, the KICP was awarded the Environmental Protection Agency's (EPA) Environmental Achievement Award. The award recognizes significant achievements in protection of public health or the environment in Colorado, Montana, North Dakota, South Dakota, Utah, Wyoming and 27 sovereign tribal nations Social: The KICP promotes water quality protection within all participating communities, reaching all segments of the population and encourages them to protect their water sources. Outreach materials are provided in both English and in Spanish and outreach takes place in a variety pubic venues and events to reach targeted audiences. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that the WRAB recommend City Council approve the KICP Plan IGA through the following motion: "The Water Resources Advisory Board recommends that City Council approve, in substantially the same form, the Intergovernmental Agreement for Implementation of the Keep it Clean Partnership Plan, dated March 9, 2013 (Attachment A) BACKGROUND: Every year millions of gallons of stormwater, in the form of rain and snow melt, flow through the City of Boulder. Runoff is collected and directed through storm drain systems to local streams, lakes, ponds, and wetlands. As water flows over urban areas, it washes pollutants such oil, sediments, chemicals, and trash into waterways. Over time, without proper treatment or preventive measures, streams and wetlands degrade impacting water quality, the aquatic ecosystem, wildlife, and recreational opportunities. To address the growing concern over the impacts of urban runoff on water quality, the federal Clean Water Act was amended in the 1990's to include permitting of municipal storm sewer systems discharges to the nation's waterways. The regulations call for cities to implement stormwater management programs to control sediment from development and construction sites, reduce potential pollutants from municipal operations, and educate residents on behaviors which may lead to water pollution. AGENDA ITEM # V PAGE 2 In 1989, in response to pending stormwater regulations, the City of Boulder (city) was one of the first communities in Colorado to establish a stormwater quality program through the Stonnwater and Flood Utility master plan process. In 1990, EPA promulgated rules establishing Phase l of the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) stormwater program. The Phase I program for MS4s requires operators of "medium" and "large" MS4s, that is, those that generally serve populations of 100,000 or greater, to implement a stormwater management program as a means to control polluted discharges from these MS4s. The Stormwater Phase 11 Rule extends coverage of the NPDES stormwater program to certain "small" MS4s (populations of under 100,000) such as the City of Boulder. Under the Phase 11 regulations smaller municipalities were required to obtain a discharge permit and implement pollution control programs by 2003. In 2001, the city and other MS4 permitted communities in Boulder County joined together to form the KICP. The KICP includes the city, the communities ot'Longmont, Lafayette, Louisville, Superior, Eric and Boulder County. The goal of the KICPis to implement shared stormwater management programs in a cost effective, collaborative way. It has been estimated that by implementing joint programs, KICP communities spend a third less than individual communities spend for the same level of programming. The KICP has received national and local recognition for its programs and has been a leader in stormwater education in Colorado. For example, H2O Jo and Flo water quality water drop/fish "mascots" were developed using a state grant received by KICP and the city and now have been adopted for stonnwater education programs throughout the state, and as far away as the Cayman Islands. To address the KICP management structure and cost sharing method to implement KICP programs an IGA was developed in 2001. The IGA also designates a steering committee as an official management and oversight body to approve programs and corresponding annual budgets. One representative from each of the participating communities is designated as a voting member of the committee. The initial IGA was developed with a five year term and has been updated every five years since 2001. The current IGA expires in March 2013. In 2012, the total population served by the KICP program was 260,873 and the total annual budget was $462,803, which equates to about $1.75 per capita. Approximately 10 percent of the KICP annual budget is for contingency, as called for by the IGA. The city's share (35 percent based on population) of the 2012 KICP costs is $162,654. The IGA requires the annual adoption by each member community of the KICP budget. By continuing to cooperate and share resources, the KICP communities and the city will be able to meet stormwater regulations in the most cost effective, efficient way possible to the benefit of our communities and for the protection of our water resources. ANALYSIS: The KICP IGA was first adopted in 2001, and has been updated every five years. The current IGA will expire in March 2013. This latest IGA update will extend the agreement with only two significant changes, which include: (1) cost sharing based on population AGENDA ITEM H V PAGE. 3 according to the latest census data; and (2) eliminating the five year term of the IGA to allow more flexibility in responding to regulatory changes, permit requirements, and/or response to requested changes by a Partner community. The KICP budget will still be developed annually and will continue to require annual adoption from each member community under a separate agreement. Under the IGA there are two termination options. The first option is to withdraw by December 31 51 for the following calendar year, which carries no financial impact, provided 30 days notice is given. In addition, a party to the IGA may terminate at any time. However , they must forfeit their contribution to the program's operating budget for that fiscal year. IGA Chanze to Address usinz Latest Census Data The current KICP IGA stipulates that costs are shared by KICP participants based on population. The updated IGA requires that the population be calculated according to the latest U.S. Census numbers. The current IGA stipulates population from a specific Census year. The change will allow the latest population figures to be used when calculating costs share. IGA Chanze to Address IGA Expiration Date The current KICP IGA stipulates a five year term. The updated IGA does not include an expiration date. Originally, the IGA's five year term was selected to align with the state's MS4 permit term. However, this year the State administratively extended the term of the permit which was due to expire in 2013, the same as the current IGA. It is unclear what time frame the new permit will include. The move away from the five year term allows the KICP to update the IGA as needed, and to allow flexibility in responding to regulatory changes, permit requirements, and/or respond to requested changes by a Partner community, or the KICP steering committee, which may not coincide with the five year interval. Staff supports the proposed changes to the IGA and believe that the IGA allows for the most current and accurate cost allocations, and provides flexibility to respond to changes in permit requirements, or water quality regulations. The KICP is an award winning program and an example of successful regional cooperation and effective program delivery. NEXT STEPS: The current draft of the KICP IGA (Attachment A) is still being reviewed by the KICP Partners and all Partners will present the IGA to their boards and commissions. It is anticipated that no substantial changes will be made and the IGA will be finalized by December 20th. Staff will update WRAB of any changes made between the time of this Agenda Item and the WRAB meeting on December 17 Any substantial changes to the IGA proposed by WRAB at the December 17`h meeting will need to be presented to the AGENDA ITEM # V PAGE 4 other Part[lcrs lol' [-Cvic\\ and approval. The final K ICP [CIA is scheduled to Vic) to City CounciI f'Or first reading on lanuarv 22, 20 13 and second reading on February 5. 201 A"rTACHMENTS: A - Draft Imergovernmental Agreement.for Implemeniution of the Keep it Clecin Parmership Plan. AGENDA ITEM 0 v PACE 5 Intergovernmental Agreement for Implementation of the Keep it Clean Partnership Plan This Agreement, is made and entered into this 9th day of March, 2013, by and between BOUL- DER COUNTY, a body politic and corporate, and the CITIES OF BO111_,D1 R, LAFAYEI-I'F,, LONGMONT, and LOUISVILLE; and the TOWNS OF F.RIF AND SUPERIOR, each a munic- ipal corporation, collectively known as the "KEEP IT CLEAN PARTNERSHIP" and referred to herein individually as a "PARTY" or collectively as the "PARTIES." RECITALS: A. The Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) Section 40 CFR 122.26 requires that operators of small municipal storm sewer systems ("MS4s") obtain permits for discharging stormwater from their systems. The PARTIES are all small MS4 operators, as defined in the Code of Federal Regulations. In Colorado, stormwater discharge permits are issued by the Water Quality Control Division (the "Division") of the Colorado Department of Public I lealth and Environment (CDPHE) under Water Quality Control Regulation No. 61, "Colorado Dis- charge Permit System Regulations" (CDPS). Small MS4s are covered under the Division's General Permit for stormwater discharges ("MS4 permit."). B. The PARTIES have all been issued certifications to discharge stormwater under the general stormwater permit issued by the CDPHE. C. The PARTIES have agreed to collaborate as the KEEP IT CLEAN PARTNERSHIP ("KICP"), in jointly developing and implementing a plan to assist the PAWIJES in comply- ing with the requirements of their MS4 permits. I). The PARTIES are individually responsible for ensuring compliance with the terms and conditions of their MS4 permits within their respective jurisdictions. E. The PARTIES are authorized to enter into this Agreement pursuant to Colorado Revised Statutes (C.R.S.) Section §29-1-201, et. seq. THEREFORE, THE PARTIES HERESY AGREE AS FOLLOWS: SECTION 1. The Keep it Clean Partnership and Keep it Clean Partnership Plan 1.01 The PARTIES will participate in the KEEP IT CLEAN PARTNERSHIP to jointly identi- fy and address stormwater quality requirements in their MS4 permits. 1.02 The PARTIES will participate in implementation of the Keep it Clean Partnership Plan ("the Plan"). The Plan is developed and maintained by the PARTIES and identifies the joint activities and programs that can help meet the minimum control measures ("MCM's") in the PARTIES' MS4 permits and, if agreed upon by the PARTIES, address other stormwater-related water quality issues in the PARTIES' jurisdictions. Keep it Clean Partnership 1GA Page i of 13 October 2012 1.03 In implementing the Plan, the PARTIES will jointly develop annual work plans and budgets, identify funding needs and apportionment of funds, and define and maintain a management structure for the Keep it Clean Partnership. SECTION 2. Steering Committee 2.01 The Steering Committee is the official management and oversight body for implementing the Plan. The Steering Committee shall consist of representatives from each of the PAR- TIES and shall direct and guide the shared components of the Plan and review and ap- prove the Plan Budget. The Steering Committee shall consider permit compliance as a primary objective in approving Plan tasks and corresponding budgets. 2.02 The Steering Committee shall periodically re-evaluate the implementation of the Plan and determine the annual contributions of each PARTY in funding the Plan and related ad- ministrative costs. 2.03 The voting membership of the Steering Committee shall consist of one designated voting representative from each of the PARTIES. An alternative voting representative may be appointed by each of-the PARTIES. 2.04 A quorum of the Steering Committee shall consist of more than fifty percent of the voting membership. Although it is anticipated that decisions will be made by group discussion to reach general agreement, any of the PARTIES may require that a formal vote be taken. A quorum must be present, and except for measures requiring a greater or lesser majority under this Agreement, the affirmative vote of at least two-thirds of all voting representa- tives present of the Steering Committee shall be required to approve any measure brought to a formal vote before the Steering Committee. 2.05 The Steering Committee shall have the authority to adopt and amend bylaws with a two- thirds vote of a quorum of all voting representatives present. 2.06 The Steering Committee shall be responsible for selecting any consultant(s) or contrac- tor(s) to be paid from Plan funds ("Outside Contractor"), and for reviewing and approv- ing contracts with Outside Contractors, including the scope(s) of work, schedules of per- formance, use of subcontractors, and compensation for such Outside Contractors. Award of contracts to Outside Contractors will be administered according to procedures outlined in Section 4 of this Agreement. 2.07 The Steering Committee shall select an employee of one of the PARTIES or an Outside Contractor to act as Keep it Clean Partnership Coordinator ("Coordinator") for the Plan. An individual employee selected as the Coordinator shall at all times be managed by the employee policies of the respective PARTY. The Coordinator shall be responsible for Plan management and administration and technical project management in accordance with the Plan, this Agreement, the Steering Committee's bylaws, and as directed by the Steering Committee in the best interest of the PARTIES as a whole and individually. The Coordinator shall be paid from Plan funds in accordance with the adopted Plan budget for providing the services described hereunder. The Coordinator shall not be responsible for providing program management services related to individual PARTY'S Keep it Clean Partnership Plan programs, but may provide such services under a separate contract with any one or more of the PARTIES if allowed by personnel policies of the PARTY where the Partnership Coordinator position resides. 2.08 The Steering Committee shall establish timelines and budgets for completion of Plan tasks. The Steering Committee shall periodically evaluate the Plan and the performance Keep it Clean Partnership IGA Page 2 of 13 October M2 of the activities and programs in the Plan, including those performed by Outside Contrac- tors, in meeting the goals and objectives of the Keep It Clean Partnership. The Plan and Plan budget will be revised as necessary to meet the goals and objectives. 2.09 The Steering Committee shall annually rate the performance of the Coordinator in man- aging the Plan, including directing the activities defined in the Plan, coordinating the PARTIES' joint responsibilities and meeting the timelines and budgets associated with the Plan. If the Coordinator is an employee of one of the PARTIES, the Steering Com- mittee's rating shall be submitted to that employer for consideration in the performance review of the Coordinator. 2.10 The Steering Committee, through its bylaws, shall establish procedures for tracking, ac- counting for, and auditing the Plan-funds. SECTION 3. Plan Budget 3.01 The PARTIES will jointly develop and fund a budget to implement the Plan. A collec- tive budget for the shared portions of the Plan (the "Plan Budget") may be based upon a projection of two consecutive calendar year cycles; however, the Plan Budget shall be adopted for only one calendar year cycle. 3.02 Subject to annual appropriation, the PARTIES shall each pay a yearly assessment into a fund established for the Plan operations for their assigned portion of the Plan Budget. The share of the Plan Budget that each PARTY shall pay is the prorated share of the costs proportional to the population within each PARTY'S permitted area based on the most current US census. Individual PARTIES may also contract for additional services through the KICP if the additional administrative fees are also allocated from the request- ing PARTY. 3.03 Except as provided in Section 6.03 of this Agreement, after all program expenses have been accrued for each calendar year, the actual costs will be reconciled with the fiends al- ready provided by each PARTY. Any differences will be reflected in assessments for the next calendar year. If a PARTY does not wish to participate in future years, unused funds will be reimbursed or an additional payment for expenses accrued will be requested at that time. 3.04 Nothing in this Agreement is intended to create a multi-fiscal-year obligation of any PARTY, or a pledge or lien on any source of funds or accounts of any PAR'T'Y. SECTION 4. Contracting/Fiscal Agent 4.01 The Contracti ng/Fi seal Agent shall be the treasurer of Plan funds. The Contracting/Fiscal Agent, in accordance with generally accepted accounting procedures, shall keep the Plan funds segregated from any other funds administered by the Contracting/ Fiscal Agent; shall credit the Plan with appropriate interest income earned on Plan finds in each calen- dar year; and shall not expend any funds except in accordance with the annual Plan Budget approved by the Steering Committee or as otherwise directed by the Steering Committee. 4.02 Unless otherwise decided by a majority vote of the Steering Committee, or as otherwise outlined in this Agreement, BOULDER COUNTY PUBLIC HEALTH ("BCPII") shall serve as the Contracting/Fiscal Agent for the Plan. 4.03 In the event that the Contracting/Fiscal Agent withdraws from providing Contract- ing/Fiscal services to the Plan or the Keep it Clean Partnership Steering Committee Keep it Clean Partnership IGA Page 3 of 13 October 2012 chooses to discontinue the services of the Contracting/Fiscal Agent, another PARTY may serve as a successor Contracting/Fiscal Agent. One hundred and twenty (120) days writ- ten notice shall be provided by either party in the event of withdrawal or discontinuation ofthe services of the Contracting/Fiscal Agent. Selection oCa Contracting/Fiscal Agent must be by majority vote of the Steering Committee. 4.04 The Contracting/Fiscal Agent shall execute contracts, which have been requested and ap- proved by the Steering Committee. 4.05 The governing body of the Contracting/Fiscal Agent, at its discretion, may delegate the authority to execute agreements and contracts approved by the Steering Committee to a designated employee. Notice of any such delegation of authority shall be provided to the Steering Committee. 4.06 The Contract ing/Fiscal Agent may request, as part of the annual Plan Budget, reim- bursement for administrative costs incurred in providing the services described in this section and in the bylaws. SECTION 5. Ancillary Rights and Duties of the PARTIES 5.01 In addition to participation in the Steering Committee, each PARTY accepts and agrees to perform the operational and administrative tasks specific to the PARTY identified in the Plan. SECTION 6. Effective Date and Term of Agreement 6.01 This Agreement shall take effect and commence on March 9, 2013, provided it has been executed by a duly authorized representative of each of the PARTIES. This 1GA super- sedes and replaces any prior 1GA between the PARTIES. 6.02 A new PARTY may initiate its participation in this Agreement by giving the Steering Committee at least ninety (90) days written notice and upon a formal vote of the Steer- ing Committee accepting their participation. Any PARTY to this Agreement must be a governmental agency with authority to enter into this Agreement under C.R.S. X29-1- 201 et seq. and must execute this Agreement prior to commencing participation. 6.03 Any PARTY may terminate its participation in this Agreement by giving the Steering Committee at least thirty (30) days written notice. Termination shall constitute forfei- ture of the terminating PARTY'S entire share of the Plan Budget for the fiscal year in which the termination occurred (including both paid and obligated but unpaid amounts) and of the terminating PARTY'S share of any unexpended, unencumbered funds rc- maining from all previous fiscal years. In addition, if funds have been appropriated for the Plan Budget for the succeeding year and notice of termination is not provided by December 31 of the current calendar year, then the terminating PARTY shall be respon- sible for its share of the Plan Budget for the succeeding calendar year. The cost alloca- tions for the remaining PART"TES may be recalculated for the following fiscal year by the remaining PARTIES without the withdrawing PARTY'S participation. SECTION 7. General Legal Provisions 7.01 This Agreement may be amended or terminated by unanimous written agreement of the PARTIES. All PARTIES agree to obtain any necessary approvals of proposed amend- ments to this Agreement from their Council or Board, as applicable, within three (3) months following acceptance by the Steering Committee. No Plan Budget amendment Keep it Clean Partnership ICA Page 4 of 13 October2012 which increases the Plan Budget will be effective unless approved by a unanimous vote of a quorum of the Steering Committee. 7.02 No PARTY shall, by entering into this Agreement, participating in the Steering Commit- tee, or agreeing to serve as Fiscal/Contracting Agent or Keep it Clean Partnership Coor- dinator, be deemed to assume responsibility for any other PARTY'S obligations to com- ply with the requirements of the Municipal Stormwater Discharge Permit. This Agree- ment is intended solely for the convenience and benefit of the PARTIES hereto and shall not be deemed to be for the benefit of any third party and may not be enforced by any third party, including, but not limited to, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, the Division, or any person acting on their behalf or in their stead. 7.03 Nothing in this Agreement shall be construed to waive or cede any jurisdiction that any of the PARTIES may possess. 7.04 Nothing in this Agreement shall create any joint or several liability or joint and several exposure to any participating PARTY for statutory or administrative violations associated with illicit discharges or compliance responsibilities. Joint action under this Agreement is strictly limited to the permitting, planning, and other related processes as described herein, unless otherwise agreed. 7.05 By entering into this Agreement, no PARTY waives or intends to waive, as to any person not a party to this Agreement, the monetary limitations or any other rights, immunities, and protections which are provided to the PARTY under the Colorado Governmental Immunity Act, Section 24-40-101 et seq., C.R.S. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the PARTIES hereto have executed this Agreement as of the dates shown below. Keep it Clcan Partnership IUA Page 5 of 13 October 2012 BOULDER COUNTY Title Date ATTEST: Kccp it 0-nit Pa-tmz-ship :GA Pi:f,e 6 cl 13 Uctobcr -ID13 CITY OF BOULDER Title Date ATTEST: Keep it Clean Partnership IGA Pale 7 of 13 October 2012 TOWN OF ERIE Title Date ATTEST: Keep it Clean Partnership IGA Page 8 of 13 October 2012 CITY OF LAFAYETTE Title Date ATTEST: Keep it Clean Partnership 1GA Page 9 of 13 October 2012 CITY OF LONGMONT Title Date ATTEST: Keep it Clean Partnership IGA Pale 10 of 13 October 2012 CITY OF LOUISVILLE Title Date AT 1'FST: Keep it Clean Partnership IGA Page I 1 of 13 October 2012 TOWN OFSUPERIOR Title Date ATTEST: Kccp it Clcan Partnership IGA Paec 12 of U October 2012 Keep it Ciean Partnership R iA I'a~e I3 of 1 October 2012 CIT YOFBOULI)ER WATER RESOURCES ADVISORY BOARD AGENDA ITEM MEETING DATE: December 17, 2012 AGENDA TITLE: Update on the Proposed Critical Facilities Ordinance PRESENTERS: Jeff Arthur, Director of Public Works for Utilities Bob Harberg, Utilities Engineering Project Management Coordinator Annie Noble, Greenways Coordinator Christie Coleman, Engineering Project Manager EXECUTIVE SUMMARY: The City of Boulder is proposing a critical facilities ordinance to increase flood protection for facilities that provide essential services, lodging, serve at-risk populations or contain hazardous materials. The draft ordinance proposes that flood protection measures be implemented and erergency management plans be developed for all of these facilities except lodging. Facilities providing lodging would only be required to develop an emergency response plan. 't'hese requirements would help reduce the risk to life and safety, ensure continuous service, minimize infrastructure damage and reduce environmental contamination following a major flood event. In March 2011, the WRAB recommended approval of the draft critical facilities flood ordinance. The proposed ordinance was also reviewed and recommended for approval by the Planning Board. City Council subsequently raised concerns about the ordinance's potential impact on the business community. At a May 29, 2012 flood study session, City Council provided feedback on the proposed ordinance. This memo provides a summary of draft ordinance revisions based on the feedback received at the May 29"' City Council Study Session-and an overview of the public outreach completed since the last WRAB meeting. The March 2011 WRAB memo, that contains a history of the proposed ordinance and an analysis of economic impacts, is presented in Attachment A. A summary of the May 29`h City Council Study Session is presented in Attachment B. This item is informational and intended to provide WRAB with an opportunity for discussion prior to consideration of a recommendation on a revised draft ordinance. AGENDA ITEM # VI PAGE. I Depending on WRAB's input, a draft ordinance could be presented for consideration as soon as Jan. 2013. BACKGROUND: Recent and historical flood events have demonstrated that flooding of critical infrastructure (like hospitals or wastewater treatment plants) disrupts needed services, increases costs and delays economic recovery of a community. Additionally, life safety issues increase during flooding if facility occupants are unprepared and unaware of the best ways to respond. To address these issues, the draft critical facilities ordinance proposes flood protection measures for critical infrastructure and emergency management plans for facilities that provide lodging or critical services. These measures will help enable essential facilities to remain operational during a flood and will reduce infrastructure damage and environmental contamination. The development of emergency response plans will provide information about how best to respond during a flood. The proposed ordinance is based on guidance from the FEMA's Community Rating System, the Colorado Water Conservation Board's floodplain regulations and the city's Comprehensive Flood and Stormwater Master Plan and Multi-Hazard Mitigation Plan. These programs and master plans call for the development of flood protection measures for critical facilities located in 500-year floodplains and provide guidance on what infrastructure is "critical" and should be protected from flood damage. Based on guidance from these programs and master plans, the following land uses are included in the proposed ordinance: • Essential Service Facilities: Examples include police and fire stations, hospitals and utility plants • At-Risk Population Facilities: Examples include nursing homes, schools and dayeares • Hazardous Material Facilities: Facilities with large amounts of chemicals • Lodging Facilities: Examples include hotels, motels, and bed and breakfasts Other local governments protect critical facilities from flood damage. For example, Ann Arbor, Michigan and Fort Collins, Colorado regulate critical facilities in the 500-year floodplain. In March 2011, the WRAB recommended approval of the draft critical facilities flood ordinance. The proposed ordinance was also reviewed and recommended for approval by the Planning Board. City Council subsequently raised concerns about the ordinance's potential impact on the business community. At a May 29, 2012 flood study session, City Council expressed support for continuing development of the ordinance and provided the following feedback: • Minimize impacts to nonprofits and small businesses • Avoid conflicts between height restrictions and elevation requirements • Review the need for 500-year floodplain regulations AGENDA ITEM # VI PAGE 2 ANALYSIS: Over the last several months, staff has modified the draft ordinance to address City Council's feedback. Modifications to reduce impacts to nonprofits and small businesses include removing restaurants, theaters and all assembly group uses from the ordinance. Potential conflicts between height restrictions and elevation requirements are avoided by allowing floodproofing for all facilities in the 500-year floodplain. Additionally, the ordinance was restructured to better communicate its focus. The previous ordinance was drafted by adding regulations governing the 500-year floodplain. While only a narrow list of regulated uses was identified, the structure of the ordinance created some perceptions that it had broad impacts. The new draft ordinance is now arranged by regulated uses to further emphasize the limited scope. Based on these changes, the ordinance proposes the following two requirements: 1. Flood protection measures for at-risk populations, essential services and hazardous materials facilities. • In the 500-year floodplain, flood protection measures are required for at-risk populations and essential services and would include floodproofing or elevating buildings. Facilities that store hazardous materials would be required to provide containment or elevate or floodproof their structure to prevent release of contaminants into floodwaters. o For at-risk populations and essential services: Flood protection measures would be required for the entire structure at the time of a substantial improvement or modification or new construction. For smaller improvements, flood protection measures would only be required for the new addition. o For hazardous materials: Flood protection measures would be required for modifications exceeding 25 percent of the value ofthe existing building, work requiring a floodplain permit or construction of new facilities. All facilities would be required to comply within 10 years. In the 100-year floodplain, facilities will still need to comply with existing flood protection requirements. 2. Emergency management plans for at-risk populations, essential services, hazardous materials and lodging facilities. • In the 500- and 100-year floodplains, emergency management plans, including either a shelter-in-place or evacuation plan, would be required. AGENDA CTEM # vT PAGE 3 o Emergency management plans would be required for modifications requiring a floodplain permit, floor area additions, substantial improvements or new construction. All facilities would be required to comply within 10 years. The proposed revisions to the critical facilities ordinance have been presented to the Planning and Development Services Advisors Group and Boulder hotel Association. The feedback received was generally supportive, with the hotel association suggesting that restaurants continue to be included in the ordinance. Staff has also been in contact with the Chamber of Commerce, but has not yet received any formal feedback. Approximately 80 facilities have been identified that, under the proposed ordinance, would be required to implement emergency management plans. Of those 80 facilities, approximately 40 critical facilities have been identified that would be required to implement flood protection measures. Nineteen of those facilities are non-governmental. The facilities that would be required to implement flood protection measures are listed in Attachment C. Notification of the proposed ordinance changes and WRAB meeting has been sent to all facilities. NEXT STEPS: The WRAB is currently scheduled to consider a recommendation on the proposed critical facilities ordinance at its January 28`' meeting. Pending WRAB's recommendation, the ordinance could be presented to the Planning Board in February or March and City Council in April or May. ATTACHMENTS: Attachment A: March 28th 2011 WRAB Memo Attachment B: May 29`h 2012 City Council Study Session Summary Attachment C: Facilities Potentially Needing Flood Protection AGENDA ITEM # vI PAGE Q CITY OF BOULDER WATER RESOURCES ADVISORY BOARD AGENDA ITEM MEETING DATE: March 28, 2011 AGENDA TITLE: Public Hearing and Final Recommendation on the Proposed Critical Facilities and Mobile Populations Ordinance PRESENTERS: Ned Williams, Director of Public Works for Utilities Bob Harberg, Utilities Planning and Project Management Coordinator Annie Noble, Greenway Coordinator Christie Coleman, Engineering Project Manager EXECUTIVE SUMMARY: The city, through its Multi Hazard Mitigation Plan, Comprehensive Flood and Stormwater Master Plan and direction from City Council has identified a need to protect critical land uses in the 500-year floodplain. This proposed ordinance addresses that need by proposing to protect critical land uses and mobile populations in the city's 100- and 500-year floodplains. Critical facilities are classified as essential services, at-risk populations and hazardous materials facilities. Examples of these types of uses include hospitals, schools, buildings containing hazardous materials and fire stations. Mobile Populations represent land uses accommodating people not familiar with Boulder's flood threat or the area they occupy. Examples of mobile population facilities include hotels, restaurants, theaters and dormitories. Complete definitions of critical facilities, essential services, at-risk populations, hazardous materials and mobile populations are included in the proposed ordinance presented in Attachment A. This attachment also incorporates updates and revisions to the proposed ordinance based on feedback received since January 2011 from facility managers, members of the public and city staff. The proposed ordinance contains provisions for critical facilities and mobile populations. The proposed critical facilities provision is primarily directed towards protecting critical uses in the 500-year floodplain outside of the currently regulated 100-year floodplain. These regulations promote the protection of critical uses through implementing floodproofing, floodwalls, elevation or other equivalent protection measures to the 500- year water surface elevation plus one foot of freeboard. The city's existing 100-year floodplain regulations will continue to be followed for all uses in the 100-year floodplain. This management strategy provides needed protection to critical uses to a 500-year flood level and was selected based on input received from business owners, the public, the AGENDA ITEM 4L6-PAGE 1 Boulder Chamber of Commerce, the Local Emergency Planning Committee, and Water Resources Advisory Board (WRAB). The proposed mobile populations provision provides for the development of emergency management plans and the dissemination of flood protection information to mobile populations in the city's 100- and 500-year floodplains. Under this ordinance, mobile population facilities will develop emergency management plans that will include either shelter in place or evacuation plans. Information on appropriate evacuation routes or sheltering locations will be dispersed to the people using these buildings, providing people who are not familiar with their environment or the city's flood potential with information they need to stay safe. Existing critical and mobile population facilities can continue to operate in their current capacity and are only subject to new regulations when they propose additions, expansions, or in the case of hazardous materials and mobile population facilities, a building modification requiring a building permit. Additional background information on the proposed ordinance was presented in staff s January 20, 2011 Critical Facilities and Mobile Populations Ordinance WRAB memo that is included in Attachment B. During the January 20th meeting, staff received feedback from the WRAB members and members of the public. Staff response and additional research related to this feedback is included in Attachment C. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that the Water Resources Advisory Board approves a recommendation to the Planning Board and City Council that the proposed critical facilities and mobile populations ordinance be adopted. ADDITIONAL ANALYSIS: An economic analysis has been completed which assesses the potential economic impacts associated with the proposed ordinance including the mobile populations and critical facilities provisions. The complete analysis is included in Attachment D and the results of the analysis are summarized below. The analysis included research on the cost to mobile population facilities associated with developing emergency management plans which will be comprised of a site specific evacuation plan or a shelter in place plan. It is anticipated that most facilities will implement an evacuation plan with only facilities situated in high hazard zones (deep flow depth and high velocity) pursing shelter in place plans since shelter in place plans must include a structural evaluation of the building. The cost of the emergency management plans including evacuation plans and shelter in place plans is detailed below: AGENDA ITEM #-6-PAGE 2 Evacuation Based Shelter in Place Based Shelter in Place -New Construction Simple Complex Simple Complex Approximate Number of 95 12 6 5 NIA Existing Facilities Impacted Estimated Plan Prep Costs $2,500 $3,600 $5,000 $11,500 $3,500 City Fees $542 $542 $1,082 $1,082 $1,082 Total Costs $3,042 $4,142 $6,582 $12,582 $4,582 Critical facilities have multiple options for compiling with the proposed regulation. The most economical options are presented in the following discussion. New critical facilities and additions to critical facilities will have the design flexibility to elevate the building to the 500-year water surface elevation plus one foot of freeboard. This approach to providing flood protection is very economical and is a preferred protection strategy in that it does not depend of structural or mechanical floodproofing measures to provide protection. The proposed analysis calculated the cost associated with elevating two representative building sizes, 4,800 square feet and 69,500 square feet, to depths of 1.5, 3.0, and 4.5 feet respectively. Costs for incorporating flood protection based on (ill are detailed below. Building Foot rint 5,400 Square Feet 65,000 S uare Feet Depth of Fill 1.50 3.00 4.50 1.50 3.00 4.50 Fill Cost per Building S q. Ft. $1.52 $4.36 $9.68 $1.13 $2.54 $4.31 Average Construction Cost per S q. Ft. $160.00 $160.00 $160.00 $135.00 $135.00 $135.00 A review of potential critical facilities located in the city's 500-year Iloodplains indicated that 30% of potential facilities will be located above the 500-year water surface elevation and to comply with the ordinance these facilities will simply document the buildings lowest adjacent grade is higher than the 500-year water surface elevation. This percentage represents a significant portion of the proposed critical facilities and indicates both the shallow flooding nature of the 500-year floodplain and that a critical facility's location in the 500-year floodplain does not automatically lead to structural flood protection improvements/costs in order to comply with the proposed ordinance. An additional 38% of potential critical facilities will be located in areas with flood depths in the range of two feet or less. Under the proposed ordinance these facilities can provide flood protection to the 500-year water surface elevation plus one foot of freeboard, or up to three feet of floodproofing depth. The proposed analysis calculated the percentage increase in cost associated with floodproofing two representative building sizes, 3,000 square feet and 35,900 square feet to depths of three feet. Costs to comply with floodproofing requirements for flood depths of two feet or less are listed below. AGENDA ITEM H-6-PAGE 3 2 Ft. or Less Foot Flood De th -Building Footprint 3,000 Square Feet 35,900 Square Feet Flood roofin Depth ? 3 > 3 Flood roofin Cost per S q. Ft. $12.00 $4.00 Average construction Cost per S q. Ft. $160.00 $135.00 Minimum Average Substantial ImprovemModification Cost per S q. Ft. tr $44.00 $44.00 The final 32% of potential critical facilities will be located in areas with flood depths greater then 2 feet. Of these facilities, approximately six are large and approximated by a 69,000 square foot facility and two are small and represented by a 3,000 square foot facility. Average flood depth for these facilities is 3.5 feet. In areas of deeper flood depths constructing ringwalls can be a cost effective solution to providing flood protection for large facilities. Costs to comply with floodprooling requirements for (food depth greater then two feet are listed below. 2+ Foot Flood Depth - Building Footprint 69,000 Square Feet 3,000 Square Feet Flood roofing Depth 4.5 4.50 Flood roofin Cost per S q. Ft. $11.00 $76.00 Average construction Cost per S q. Ft. $135.00 $160.00 Minimum Average Substantial Improvement or Modification Cost per S q. Ft. $44.00 $44.00 The small facilities in the above table represent two day care facilities operating out of converted single family homes. These uses are businesses operating out of buildings that are not dependant of special zoning, large amounts of land, buildings that facilitate specialized industrial processes or locations that meet response time requirements. For these uses, alternative residential buildings are fairly ubiquitous and a cost effective alternative to providing flood protection for the existing structure would be relocation to a residential structure outside of the floodplain. It should be noted that hazardous materials facilities will be required to protect those materials from being released during a 500-year flood event. Existing Environmental Protection Agency, U.S. Department of Transportation, fire code or Occupational Safety and Health Administration requirements outline best management practices for the treatment and storage of hazardous materials that may also protect the material from flooding by mandating watertight containers that will not able to leave a facility during times of flooding. As a result, it is anticipated that hazardous materials facilities will choose to document that their hazardous materials will not be released at or from a facilities during flooding for a significantly lower cost than floodproofing the entire structure. In the rare case that an entire hazardous materials facility needs to be elevated or floodproofed, the cost analysis above provides a worst case cost of compliance. AGENDA ITEM 4-6-PAGE 4 1V1A,mix OF 013TIONS: Water Resources Advisory Board options fbr review and consideration inCILICIe: • Accept the proposed ordinance and recommend that Planning, Board and City Council adopt the ordinance. • Request additional public involvement, information or evaluation on the proposed ordinance. • Propose modifications to the ordinance and recommend that the Planning Roard and City Council adopt the modified ordinance. A matrix that represents alternative options that were developed from reedback of fticility managers. members of the public and stuff members is presented below: AGENDA ITEM # G PAGE 5 Option Positive Aspects of this Option Negative Aspects of this Option Decrease compliance threshold for storage of -Reduces the burden of these regulations for the -Will extend the amount of time it takes to hazardous materials from modifications owners of existing hazardous material storage. bring existing storage of hazardous materials requiring a building permit to substantial -Allows thresholds to be consistent with at-risk into compliance. modifications or substantial improvements of population and essential service buildings. associated buildings. Require Emergency Management Plans for -Provides a measure of flood safety for people - Establishes an additional requirement for critical facilities categorized as either essential occupying these types critical facilities. owners of these types of critical facilities. services or accommodating at-risk populations -1s redundant with the ultimate critical upon new use or modification requiring a facilities objective of making the facility safe building permit. from flooding. - Will require additional staff time and recourses to enforce the development and continued enactment of additional emergency management plans. Reject ordinance and recommend continued use -Eliminates the burden of these regulations for the -Does not address 500-year flood protection of existing Boulder Revised Code. owners of critical facilities and facilities standards for critical facilities as identified by accommodating mobile populations. City Council, the Multi Hazard Mitigation Plan and Comprehensive Flood and Stormwater Management Plan. 7 z Extend the grandfathered time frame for -Allows buildings from which critical facilities • Will increase the timeframe and make it discontinued critical and mobile populations have moved to be continued in a existing non- more difficult to bring existing facilities into buildings from 12 consecutive months to 24 conforming status for a longer period of time. compliance with the proposed ordinance. months. - Discontinued use time frame for critical facilities and mobile populations will not match discontinued use time frames in other areas of the Boulder Revised Code. c: Next Steas: City staff has researched and responded to feedback received from the public and the WRAB in the January 20"' meeting and based on that response requests a final recommendation to submit the ordinance to the Planning Board and City Counci l for approval. The Planning Board public hearing and discussion is tentatively planned for May. The City Counci I Public hearing and discussion is anticipated in occur in June and July. ATTACHMENTS: A: Proposed Ordinance B: January 20, 2011 Critical Facilities and Mobile Populations WRAB Memo (please see memo at this link - Agenda Item 5: f~tt►j:/.'~~~xx~_bouldcrcolor~~clo. ov/inric~.ph ?upliun-com_conte1)t&task--viexYLid-l4214 &Itemid=2330 C: Summary of WRAB Feedback with Staff Response and Additional Research D: City of Boulder Proposed Floodplain Ordinance Cost Analysis AGENDA ITEM #-6-PACE 7 Attachment A of Agenda Item 6 - Critical Facilities Dec. 2012 WRAB packet 1 ORDINANCE NO. 2 AN ORDINANCE AMENDING CHAPTERS 9-1 AND 9-3, AND 3 SECTION 9-16-1, B.R.C. 1981, TO PROTECT CRITICAL FACILITIES AND MOBILE POPULATOINS IN THE 500 4 YEAR FLOODPI.AIN 5 6 BE IT ORDAINED BY THE Cl'I Y COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF BOULDER, 7 COLORADO: 8 Section 1. Section 9-3-2, BRC 1981 is amended to read: 9 9-3-2 Floodplains. 10 (a) Legislative Intent: The purpose of this section is to regulate certain areas of the city subject to 11 flooding in order to protect the public health, safety, and welfare by: 12 (1) Restricting or prohibiting certain uses that are hazardous to life or property in time of flood; 13 (2) Restricting the location of structures intended for human occupancy and regulating the 14 manner in which such structures may be built in order to minimize danger to human life within and around such structures; 15 (3) Requiring that those structures allowed in the floodplain be expanded or enlarged, and 16 equipment and fixtures be installed or replaced, in a manner designed to prevent their being washed away and to assure their protection from severe damage; 17 (4) Regulating the method of construction and replacement of water supply and sanitation 18 systems in order to prevent disease, contamination, and unsanitary conditions; 19 (5) Maintaining for public inspection available maps delineating areas subject to such provisions 20 in order to protect individuals from purchasing or using lands for purposes that are not suitable: 21 (6) Protecting and preserving the water-carrying and water-retention characteristics and capacities of watercourses used for conveying and retaining floodwaters; ;iqd 22 (7) Obtaining and maintaining the benefits to the community of participating in the National 23 Flood Insurance Program; 24 t8) Rckwirin- rrltit„I l':L 1161 < IC,! Ir [II' l llIL11 1" h.: L~~\P,utttetl or c11lonxd in :t l1Tnnncr 25 Jesiuned to assure thcirLotectioln lion] tlotldint: and continued Ojxr 16011 after 11nodine; and 26 01 RCpnlrinz mobile oovulation facilities located in the floDdplain to development emersencv II~YIn17 clnCtlt I°I1111~ t~1 Ilntitl:'t' 111;11 food orot;:Clion infornialion i~ iIISStndiwled to focilii% tm r . 27 (b) Flooding May Occur: The degree of flood protection provided by the terms of this section has 28 been determined to be reasonable for regulatory purposes. Floods of greater magnitude will Formatted' t~~ght ':Ww",a,,C",na R,Admin\Communica`0,,111W Roard,W111A111acket,\201112011-3\6-Critical Facilities Ordinanc,1AIIA-Critical Facilities Floodplain Amendments Ordinance 3-18.2011 doc I occur, and flood heights may be increased as a result of natural or human-made causes. The provisions of this section do not imply that areas outside of the floodplain or land uses permitted 2 within the floodplain are free from flooding, flood hazard, or flood darnages. A grant or approval 3 by the city under the requirements of this section does not constitute a representation, guarantee, or warranty of any kind or nature by the city or any city official or employee of the practicability 4 or safety of any structure or proposed use, and it creates no liability to or cause of action against the city or any city official or employee for any damages from flood or otherwise that may result 5 from such structure or use. 6 (c) Scope and Application: 7 (1) The requirements of this section supplement those imposed on the same lands by any 8 underlying zoning provisions of this code or other ordinance of the city. ff there is a conflict between such requirements, the more restrictive controls. 9 (2) If a lot or parcel of land lies partly within the ~ulr t:,t Inn-,~:,Ir, com4+ nc~; tr high 10 hazard zone-_'i -413 ia-t+.'iti-+r3tt' t .•I !rrt fay?atir tr I 1 the part(s) of such lot or parcel lying within such area or areas shall meet all the standards and requirements of such respective area as prescribed by this section. For the purposes of new 12 construction, if any portion of a structure lies partly within the 500-year, 100-year, conveyance zone w high hazard zone, (-tftlie ..,l r+ ,tr re»zrr fife li+:~~~FFa ~~Feuksu?-rte rt wF dui-~tAtr 13 4 -all the standards and requirements of this section shall apply to the entire structure. 14 (3) If lands located outside the city limits are included within the iioo•1. Vii,. the lloe3d iege 500-yeiir or loo-Year Ilo(ulnlain., the conveyance zone or the high hazard zone, the 15 requirements of this section shall apply to such lands upon annexation. 16 (d) Administration: The city manager shall administer the requirements of this section and shall: 17 (1) Determine that the requirements of this section have been rnct before issuing any permit for 18 development in the floodplain; 19 (2) Obtain and maintain for public inspection any certificates of floodproofmg required by this section, and any information on the elevation (in relation to mean sea level) of the level of the 20 lowest floor (including basement) of all new or substantially improved structures, and 21 information specifying whether or not such structures contain a basement, and if the structure has been floodproofed, the elevation (in relation to mean sea level) to which the structure was 22 floodproofed; 23 (3) Notify Boulder County and the Colorado Water Conservation Board before permitting any change in a watercourse and submit evidence of such notice to FFMA; 24 (4) Adopt rules interpreting and implementing the requirements of this section including, without 25 limitation, application procedures for floodplain development permits and specifications for the 26 floodproofing of structures, substantial improvements, and utilities; 27 (5) Assure that the Boulder Valley Comprehensive Plan is consistent with the floodplain management objectives of this section and the regulations of FFMA; 28 Formatted: Right S:5PW1ParkCentraMAdminlCommanicationstPW BnardslWRAHtPackets120t 112011-3VGCritical Tncilities Ordinance\Att A-Critical Facilim Floodplain Amendments Ordinance 3-I8-2011 dec _2_. I (6) Make necessary interpretations of the exact location of the boundaries of the 41o4plr1itr 2 5f10- Year and Iltfl-Y'ear Iktudplains, the t' the conveyance zone and the high hazard zone; " 3 (7) Amend the boundaries of the high hazard zone and the conveyance zone pursuant to subsection (f) of this section; 4 (8) Determine that all necessary permits have been obtained from state, federal, or local agencies 5 the approval of which is required before issuing any permit for development in the floodplain; 6 (9) Require that persons changing a watercourse maintain the watercourse so that its flood carrying capacity is not diminished; 7 (10) Require that new and replacement water supply systems in the floodplain be designed to 8 minimize or eliminate infiltration of floodwaters into the systems; 9 (11) Require that new and replacement sanitary sewage systems within the floodplain be 10 designed to minimize or eliminate infiltration of floodwaters into the systems and discharges from the systems into floodwaters; 11 (12) Require that on-site waste disposal systems be located to avoid impairment to them or 12 contamination from them during flooding; and 13 (13) Obtain, review, and reasonably utilize any base flood elevation and floodway data available from federal, state, and other sources, including data developed pursuant to chapter 9-12, 14 "Subdivision," B.R.C. 1981, as criteria for requiring that all new development meet the 15 requirements of this section. 16 (e) Appeals: Any person contesting the city manager's interpretation of a boundary location under paragraph (d)(6) or this section, or any person aggrieved by the granting or denial of a 17 floodplain development permit, may appeal such determination to the planning hoard through the process described in section 9-4-4, "Appeals, Call-Ups and Public 11carings," B.R.C. 1981. The 18 request shall set forth the reason and basis for the appeal and such other information as the 19 manager may prescribe by rule. 20 (n Map Amendments: As watercourse or flood channel improvements or mapping corrections are made, the city manager may amend the flood regulatory area maps to recognize the changed 21 conditions produced by such improvements or corrections provided that no such amendments or corrections may change a FEMA "area of special flood hazard" or "regulatory floodway" unless 22 the city is in receipt of a letter of map amendment or a letter of map revision issued by FBMA. 23 (g) Flood Regulatory Areas: 24 (1) 1i". ! 1)_;.8 apply to the area shown as 25 floodplain on the most recent maps adopted by the city council, as amended from time to time by the city manager pursuant to subsections (d), (e), and (f} of this section. The regulatory 26 floodplain encompasses •+1:fl.i'~~G___.~I.',i.~. -.;t~r:i111 r.ll!L'1?~`+=?ili ~!_±__,Ji ;d'i;l 11'1111 Ilii Ile)) I 1 it, th,: I rrll_,~~ aril:: the lil±h , 0 1 : of Ilood risk ill Formatted: Font: 12 pt 27 t I•+lirlllll 111' x01. lc',';I iki,dirl,im thepne hundred-year floodplain, 4k-44)o[-4i4"_ Formatted: Font: 12 pt, NotSttikethrough,Not 28 the conveyance zone, and the high hazard zone. I_"Ll! lhtr I: Highlight Formatted: Right 'ApW1P.","tralUldmin\COnlmunlcatlonglPW RoardsiWRrVilPackels12 0 1 111111 1-Mli-Critica1 Facilities O,dl"ancelAtt A-Critical Facilitit Floodplain Amendments Ordinance 3-18.2011 dec -3r 1 _ following regulations governing eacE7 fir, I, ,lctul< are cumulative. out 111' lo%%L!+t x1t~lYk of 11t-ing{ risk throiwh (tic hlghc6t- and not 2 exclusive, I gin; , I It n_~( nnn_ Iht ;I,t, ~t•,Ir Ilttndplain ulau Moray to tan Ino ,'%Lr 3 Il , ~t_I _-i~a-- slot ,-itti rllti. .I ill:l ltr_11 17.5f~~ 1'I1~ ~41thc_tll tl lit nom,-_'I?Lrlllll: 11~G ItCr; I„I"'Ild ?trati al's iw^ il!V'1'lip Illi ~I11 k,:.!r Ilr ar; nri.lllt. I11~) _',91 Illh.ll`L: II r sl 4 (2) In addition to the regulatory areas identified in paragraph (g)(1) of this section, the City has 5 adopted the areas of special flood hazard identified in the Flood Insurance Study for Boulder County; effective October 4. 2002, and delineated on the Flood Insurance Rate Map for Boulder 6 County and the City of Boulder as adopted by the City in compliance with 44 C.F.R, chapter 1. 7 In no event will the regulations contained in this section be interpreted to permit any action not permitted under those regulations promulgated by FEMA for the regulation of areas of special 8 flood hazard and regulatory floodways. 9 Section 2. Chapter 9-3, BRC 1981 is amended to add the following new section 9-3-2.5: 10 ~ Regulalions GL)yerai 2 011L.500-Year h'klndplain. 11 RO 111e folfol+"ing MILlirements nPOv to critical facilities locuted in a 500-year Iluudnlain. 12 1 I 1 Am person constructing a mm ef- al-risk oonulation or essential service Formattea; tr~dene: teR: 0.5° 13 erideal facilile or making suhslantia[ modifications or substantial improvements to existing at-risk population or essential service huildirwi -14414-shall eonstrtlct the entire 14 huilding leitll the lowest Moor ptact d ai or ;above the 500-year hood el;.-vntion alas one fool of'Irechoard or Iloodproof, includine 1,!m KINenient, to this clcvation. In rases +%here 15 the SIli1-scar water surface elevation -plus one time of freeboard is ereater than the flood 16 lirOWC11011 Cie%Minn 111e 11004 hrttiedinn Cle%%Jinn niav he u-ud. t A-1~1 An% person niakine an expansion or an enkiree relent to :ut cxistine er+Fiellal t Formatted: tndcllt: Left: t 17 t;ac-+li-t-tat-ri.k population or es;;enti:ll service building not meeting the above 18 lhreshold shall iloodprool'or clcvatc the fugctil_floor. incfudiog am basements. ol* the expansion or anlareenlcnt to Or aboGe the 500-Near flood elevation plus One 19 ]lain of frcchoord. In cases %Ocre the 500-sear water stirlace elevation plus one 20 (oot of freeboard is greater Ihun the flood protection elevation tan fond lrolcction clcvalion nliv, be used. 21 (B) Ploodpronling: Whenever thk section reowres a buildine or structures to be 22 lloodpoolid, the tiptoe+ing standards shall be rnct. i Such b_1i1d_in2 or:A ICn uY shall he floodpronfcd in accordance with nm• FarmaHed: Endena: Left: IS" 23 rules for Hoodprooflne promulunled by the city manaeer pursuant to 24 chapter 1-4"Rulemakine." HAI'_ 1981. arad with current FEMA N4iiion:tl flood hisurvwc Program (NrFIP) feefvucal Bulletins; 25 l iil Such buildinl; or structure shall he IluodprooCed to the 500-vcar water 26 surface elcvatiorl 01111, One tbot or to the flood urotection elevation. where the flood protection clcvalion is 11Mcr. in such a manner that the building 27 or structure is %t.IICrliChl with malls subst,Inli'311 inipermeuble to the passage of tvatcr and in a manner rcquirine no human intervention; 28 FormaHedo Right g 1pll~parkCentral',AdminKbmmunicutionslPW BnardsiwRABIYxCkC1s12o1 11111 1-316-Daical Facilities Ordinancl All A-Critical Facirities Floodplain Amendments Ordinance 3-18-2011 doe .e}-r (iii) Such huiIdine or StlltCtat-C shall have MILICIUral Colnp0n01IS Caapahle t}I' resistinu proiected hvdrostutic and hvdrodvnamic loads and the ctlt cls of buoyanm and 3 No l 5ueh Iluadl)ro()lin'-' shall lie certilied l» a Colorado reeistered prul,cs5ional en;incer or registered architect In COT I with this 4 pan nL -aph. Such ccriif icaiions shall he provided 10 dte city "Umaleer as st t 5 Barth in paragraph 9-3-21(101, 11A.C, 1931. rv) In 500-vcar 1loodplain orc as located out,ide of the 100-year floodplain 6 floodtolls mectin,! the recltdrentews c71, this section are an accepled Form 7 of floodproofina. 8 9 L2 ;\it »jwrson eottstnicting a ncoo havardaus material; building, or making a 1110dif-IGIC011 recluiring a huildhL, permit io on existiny huildine shall ,echo: the 10 hazardous materials Tram Iloodin, as verified in a written and siLned amnion, including a d0eunlClltcd.,itC evaluation. Of a Colorado licen,cil l7rnl ,signal en ,.inecr. Ixlsecl upon a site o'111latian of the faciliv. Ioca Con. Ilood threat anil hazardous 1natCrial 5tor1Ce 12 conditions. Iliac the lwzardnus materiatl will not he reloased at or t'rom the GWility cluriny, a 500-ov r Ilood event 13 Formatted: Indent: Left: C 14 15 13211 Existuai Uses. Ilac use n1' an% land or sirlmilve that ovas laaxful beforc; the application of Ibis ;canon or ;Utv tmendnlent thrrctn but Ill ill SIUCS 1101 C01401111 In the 16 rcutiircmcntti of this scclioll may lic continued SUh ct t(! the re uiremclits of tllis ScctiOn. 11'such a use Writ contorming to the rcyuiremcmS ol'Ihis Section is discontirmied for twelve 17 consecntivc vwriths, no person Shall use the land or shuctm-e lhcreafter tulles Such use 18 cnniormti to Ihr rccluircrnenls nl'Ihis scclion. t r L~'1 rmatted: Indent: Left: t3', Flrst llne: 0,5" cF#d~*e SF 1HRICRIFeS Fo ~r ti 20 ; ,~'*7~~srrr; (F Inmrr~-vi-aEFkF tm ii i#:-r~'s- I;ttF,kl~F11014 Id i+l flfFHF44it,'~ec'01ii;;-ii7~;6Fr 21 44&1~-t3►a Pro--, In 4 22 ( tit t~rri~c4i+t_ of stft+etu+rsl} Il .e Olt lp i letl to tl SOO . + le}ht irie ~r lx~€r+bi hs l 23 I. .1._ r, ail; .,httFkc~f~~#t~++t1#-~tll ett1~stat~~taL~+n~~lelt}E1te~ 24 Cam- e}c h l 25 1 1' -,Ir att4-1~;ei3't~tlwtt:'=nom!«lTa+itl Fl~etJ+i E*1 t?tza~=atl ac#r1k ~ r{xrCat laakl kin tiv~t til IecN-iV_ a•C Iccr clsa r iwttixfe -priAl E-s,e~4+i a#-tgia et~ Formatted: Went, Lett: p.5" 26 or esistim., critical 1'acilitic, located-?~+a.4 + s 41m tll,: ch, ,i;lr ofan accredited levcc or a 28 Pmvisiunally Acmditcd Leoce and mapped Zone X (shadod) in accordance %o-Wi -1-1 CF R Formatted: Right S:1PW\ParkCentra1Wdmin\1- ,,ication,I'A' B,ards\IIRABII,,Iers12011110113\b-Critical Facilities 0r1inancMI, A-Critical Facilities Floodplam A,nendrrtcnts 0,dlnnncc 3-19.2011 dnc . -5- I ti 65.1()• shitll he exempt fnun QZc rcouiremcnIs ofIhi~, Semion 9-3-2,5. 11r0+•idcd the loge is designed to a minimum 500-Near (loud elevation plu. one lboI of 11ceboard and it is 2 operated and nlalintained in accordance evitli the reuuirenlcnts set Birth in 44 CH65.10 3 and Rule 10 of the Colorado Rules and Itceulations 1'01. Regtdatorv Floodrilains in Colorado. 4 • - Formatted; Indent: Left: p" 5 (bI~jl A vm~il5ile-)ltpulation f;acilitl, including hotels, motels. dormitories. bed and hreakfasis. hostels and ❑sscrnl 1% group use. as dclined in the cilv's adopted version of the International 6 Ill-61dina Codc, shall dcveloh an emergence managcrncnt plan upon ^ nc~% Ilse or rtuYdilieution requiring it htiildin<e ncrmiL r+F ~Yxt~a3tYSi . The emcreencv maniaecmcnl plan ,hall 7 he Inc,lted on the inside of cinch doorwae° leading to a separate unit in a hotel. nxotcl. dormitora. 8 bed and hreaklitst or huslcl and disnlaved in it promincm location \%j-1hin anv asscmbly group use. No Iacilit., shall fail to maintain such emergence nnuaagcmcnt plans. Lincrectlcv management 9 plans grill al at minimum include either all evacuation vliu} (developed h~ a rcgistcrcd arrllitect or Colorado registered prolcssional eiwinccr) or a shelter in place plan (developed by a Colorado 10 registered professional structural cligineerl 11 tee NO uses recul:ued in the 500-year floodplain wn% occur prior to the issuance of a illoodplidil 12 dcvclopmeni permit[A)ursu:urt to ,:~:lio, i 9- 1-0- "Hoc)ilpl_lin D vefoy7nunt Termite." IMU'. 1981. 13 Section 3. Section 9-3-3, BRC 1981 is amended to read: 14 9-3-3 Regulations Governing the,100-Year Flo lain. plight do Fo Font; tz pt, No underline, Not L Highlight t 15 (a) General Provisions: In the entire 100-Year floodplain, the following standards apply: 16 (1) Floodplain Development Permit: Except as specified in paragraph (a)(1)(A), no development in the 100-year floodplain may occur prior to the issuance of a floodplain development permit 17 pursuant to section 9-3-6, "Floodplain Development Permits," B.R.C. 1981. 18 (A) Activities exempt from a floodplain development permit: The following activities are 19 allowed within the flood regulatory area and do not require a floodplain development permit: 20 (i) "Maintenance" as defined in chapter 9-16 "Definitions" that do not constitute a substantial improvement and do not affect the efficiency or capacity of the conveyance zone or high hazard 21 zone. 22 (ii) Sidewalks, concrete, asphalt or stone flatwork that does not result in the establishment or 23 expansion of parking area and does not modify existing grade by more than six inches. 24 (iii) Underground utilities that do not modify existing grade. (iv) Poles, lines, cables, sign posts, landscaping and artwork that do not affect the efficiency or 25 capacity of the conveyance zone or high heard zone. 26 (v) Temporary facilities that are not permanently attached to the ground such as tents, traffic 27 control devices and law furniture provided that they will not affect the efficiency or capacity of the conveyance zone or high hazard zone, or they will remain in place for no more than 30 days 28 Formatted: Right S:',PWIParkCerdrallAdminlCommunicalions\PW Boards\111.1Fackets\20111ll, I 1-3l6-Critical Facir!lie, OrdinanceWtt A-Critical Facilities Floodplain Amendments Ordinance 3-18-2011 doe 1 (2) Anchoring: 2 (A) All new construction and substantial improvements or substantial modifications shall be anchored to prevent flotation, collapse, or lateral movement of the structure and be capable of 3 resisting the hydrostatic and hydrodynamic loads. 4 (B) All manufactured homes must be elevated and anchored to resist flotation, collapse, or lateral 5 movement and capable of resisting the hydrostatic and hydrodynamic loads. Methods of anchoring may include, but are not limited to, use of over-the-top or frame ties connecting to 6 permanent ground anchors, in addition to any anchoring requirements for resisting wind forces and any tie-down requirements of chapter 10-12, "Mobile Homes," B.R.C. 1981, Requirements shall include, without limitation, the following: 8 (i) Over-the-top ties shall be provided at each of the four corners of the manufactured homes. 9 For manufactured homes fifty feet or longer, two additional tics per side are required at intermediate locations. For manufactured homes less than fifty feet long, one additional tie per 10 side is required; 11 (ii) Frame lies shall be provided at each of the four comers of the manufactured homes. For 12 manufactured homes fifty feet or longer, five additional ties per side are required at intermediate points. For manufactured homes less than fifty feet long, four additional ties per side are 13 required; 14 (iii) All components of the anchoring system shall be capable of carrying a force of four thousand eight hundred pounds; and 15 (iv) Any additions to manufactured homes shall be similarly anchored. 16 17 (3) Construction Materials and Methods: (A) All new construction, substantial improvements, and substantial modifications shall be 18 constructed with materials and utility equipment resistant to flood damage as outlined in FFMA 19 'technical Document 2-93, Flood-Resistant Materials Requirements. 20 (B) All new construction, substantial improvements, and substantial modifications shall be constructed using methods and practices that minimize flood damage. 21 (C) All new construction, substantial improvements and substantial modifications shall be 22 constructed with electrical, heating, ventilation, plumbing, and air conditioning equipment and other service facilities that are designed and located (by elevating or floodproofing the 23 components) so as to prevent water from entering or accumulating within the components during 24 flooding conditions. 25 (4) Utilities: 26 (A) All new and replacement water supply systems shall be designed to minimize or eliminate infiltration of floodwaters into the systems. 27 (B) All new and replacement sanitary sewage systems shall be designed to minimise or eliminate 28 infiltration of floodwaters into the systems and discharge from the systems into floodwaters. Formatted: Right S-.1F'W:ParkCentrallAdmin\CommunicationslVW BnardsRVRABIPacketsl20111201 I-316-C in-l Facilities 11,1 nanceWli A-Critical Facilities Floedplain Amendments Oidinance 3-19-2011 doc _7_a I (C) On-site waste disposal systems shall be located to avoid impairment or contamination during 2 flooding. 3 (5) Subdivision Proposals: 4 (A) All subdivision proposals shall demonstrate efforts to minimize flood damage. 5 (B) All subdivision proposals shall have public utilities and facilities such as sewer, gas, electrical, and water systems located and constructed to minimize flood damage. 6 (C) All subdivision proposals shall have adequate drainage provided to reduce exposure to flood 7 damage. 8 (D) Base flood elevation data shall be provided for subdivision proposals and other proposed development, 9 10 (E) No subdivision proposal shall create a lot which is unbuildable pursuant to this section. (6) Floodproofing: Whenever this section requires a building or structure to be floodproofed, the 1 I following standards shall be met: 12 (A) Such building or structure shall be floodproofed in accordance with any rules for 13 floodproofing promulgated by the city manager pursuant to chapter t-4, "Rulemaking," B.R.C. 1981, and with current FEMA National Flood Insurance Program (NFIP) Technical Bulletins; 14 (B) Such building or structure shall be floodproofed to the flood protection elevation in such a 15 manner that the building or structure is watertight with walls substantially impermeable to the 16 passage of water and in a manner requiring no human intervention; 17 (C) Such building or structure shall have structural components capable of resisting projected hydrostatic and hydrodynamic loads and the effects of buoyancy; and 18 (p) Such tloodproofing shall be certified by a Colorado registered professional engineer or 19 registered architect to comply with this paragraph. Such certifications shall be provided to the city manager as set forth in paragraph 9-3-2(d)(2), B.R.C. 1981. 20 (7) a- t!!!rt#t+Hs N.4tt4c%ri-46,-44 ' k?F. 11 j cs 4IE)Ael no hllahtted: Font: 12 pt, Not Strikethrough, Not 21 6,., .F +6., --4 rt,.- n.....1., t..:,. L, po-,41 St~1I'3°l a C1tiOlltle 9 9 Formatted: Font: 12 pt below the hood protection clef atinn is llroil>ihil«I exp~ for the storage of gasoline in existing 72 and replacement underground tanks in existing gasoline service stations and service Formatted: Font: 12 pt, No underline, Not g g garages, Highlight 23 which tanks are designed to prevent infiltration and discharge into floodwaters and which are Formatted: Font; 12 pt adequately anchored and shielded against rupture. For purposes of this paragraph, "existing" 24 means in place and in use on January 1, 1989. 25 (8) Automobile Parking: Notwithstanding other provisions of this title, no person shall establish 26 an area for automobile parking in any portion of the floodplain where flood depths exceed eighteen inches. 27 (9) Flood Warning System: No owner of a hotel, a motel, a dormitory, a rooming house, a hostel, 28 a school, a bed and breakfast, a daycare center, a group home, or a residential or congregate care Formatted: Right 5:V'WV'arkCentrallAdmin\CommuniuationslPW ©uardslWRABU'ackets120 1 11201 1-3W-CriticalFaciliuesOrdinancel.4ttA-CriticalFaciliues Fluudplain Amendments Ordinance 3-18-2011 duc I facility located in the Boulder Creek floodplain shall fail to provide a flood warning system approved by the city manager that is connected to a point of central communication in the 2 building with twenty-four-hour monitoring. No such person shall fail to maintain such a flood 3 warning system. 4 (10) Rental Property: No owner of property that is located in a floodplain and subject to a city rental license under chapter 10-3, "Rental Licenses," B.R.C. 1981, shall fail to post on the 5 exterior of the premises at the entrance a sign approved by the city manager stating that the property is subject to flood hazard and containing such further information and posted at such 6 other locations inside the building as the city manager may require. 7 (11) Manufactured Housing: All manufactured homes placed in the city after July 1, 1989, and 8 all manufactured homes which are substantially improved or substantially modified shall be elevated on a permanent foundation so that the lowest floor of the manufactured home is at or 9 above the flood protection elevation and is securely anchored to an adequately anchored foundation system, and shall meet the anchorage and tie-down requirements of paragraph (a)(2) I 0 of this section. 1 1 (12) Recreational Vehicles: In order to reduce debris and hazard potential, recreational vehicles 12 shall either: a) be in the floodplain for fewer than one hundred eighty consecutive days, b) be fully licensed and ready for highway use, or c) meet the permit requirements and elevation and 13 anchoring requirements for manufactured homes. 14 (13) Structure Orientation: In order to minimize the obstruction to flow caused by buildings, to 15 the extent consistent with other city policies regarding solar access, new structures shall be placed with their longitudinal axes parallel to the predicted direction of flow of floodwaters or be 16 placed so that their longitudinal axes are on lines parallel to those of adjoining structures. 17 (14) Existing Uses: The use of any land or structure that was lawful before the application of this section or any amendment thereto but that does not conform to the requirements of this section 18 may be continued subject to the requirements of this section. If such a use not conforming to the 19 requirements of this section is discontinued for twelve consecutive months, no person shall use the land or structure thereafter unless such use conforms to the requirements of this section. 20 (15) New Uses: All uses allowed by the underlying zoning district may be established, subject to 21 the requirements of this section, except for the outdoor or uncontained storage of moveable objects below the flood protection elevation. 22 (16) Existing Structures: Any structure in existence before the enactment of this section or any 23 amendment thereto that does not conform to the requirements of this section may remain or may 24 undergo rehabilitation subject to the requirements of this section. Further, any sucli structure may be otherwise improved as follows: 25 (A) Any person making an expansion or an enlargement to an existing residential structure shall 26 elevate the lowest floor, including the basement, of the expanded or enlarged portion to or above 27 the flood protection elevation. 28 Formatted: R[ght S:\PW\ParkCenlrahAdmw1Communic,1,-,1PW Bon,1,1W11A111Paekecs12011\2011-3\6-Critical Facilities Ordi"anoelAll A-Critical Facilities Floodplain,lmendments Ordinanuo 3-18-2011 doc _c)w 1 (B) Any person making an expansion or an enlargement to an existing nonresidential structure shall floodproof or elevate the lowest floor, including the basement, of the expanded or enlarged 2 portion to or above the flood protection elevation. 3 (C) Any person making a substantial modification or a substantial improvement to any existing 4 nonresidential structure shall floodproof or elevate the lowest floor, including the basement, of the substantially modified or improved portion to or above the flood protection elevation and 5 shall floodproof the remainder of the existing structure. 6 (D) Any person making a substantial modification or a substantial improvement to any existing residential structure shall elevate the lowest floor, including the basement, of the entire residential structure to or above the flood protection elevation. 8 (17) New Structures: Construction of new structures shall meet the following requirements: 9 (A) Any person constructing a new residential structure shall elevate the lowest floor, including 10 the basement, to or above the flood protection elevation; 11 (B) Any person constructing a new nonresidential structure shall floodproof in a manner requiring no human intervention or elevate the lowest floor, including the basement, to or above 12 the flood protection elevation with the following exceptions: 13 (i) Open air carwashes; 14 (ii) Unheated pavilions; 15 (iii) Unfinished or flood resistant building entryways or access areas; 16 (iv) Garden storage sheds; 17 (v) Sidewalks, paving, or asphalt, concrete, or stone flatwork; 18 (vi) Fences: and 19 (vii) Poles, lines, cables, or other transmission or distribution facilities of public utilities. 20 I('1 Any po:rson cousiructin:, a nc%y residential structure on a property romoved Iron the 21 llondPlain h1 the issuance of a FGtiIA Letter of \lan Revision unused on Fill (LOMR-F) shrill elevate the lm%em foor._includiim., the basement, to or above the Iood protection elevation Ihm 22 cyt;;lcd prior to the Placement of fill. Non-residential buildines can he elevated or iloodproofed 23 ID the Hood protection elevation that existed prior to the ulaceinent of (ill. Critical facilities %%ifh phNsical re(luircntentS for belowprade construction are exempted front thi; rrtfitirenleltt- 24 (18) Enclosures: Enclosures below the lowest floor that are unfinished or flood resistant, usable 25 solely for parking of vehicles, crawl spaces, building access or storage, in an area that is not a basement, and that are not floodproofed as set forth in this section shall meet the following 26 requirements: 27 (A) Compliance with the provisions of paragraphs (a)(2), (a)(3), and (a)(4) of this section; and 28 Forrnatted: Rlght S:1PW1ParkCentrallAdmin\Communication,IPW BoardslW \P,,ckets120 1 1120 11-316-Critical Facilities Ordina",Mll A-Critical Facirilie, Floodplain Amendments Ordinance 3-18-2011 doc - In 1 (B) Design and construction that automatically equalizes hydrostatic flood forces on exterior 2 walls by allowing for the entry and exit of floodwaters. 3 (i) Designs for meeting this requirement shall meet or exceed the following minimum criteria: a minimum of two openings having a total net area of not less than one square inch for every 4 square foot of enclosed area subject to flooding shall be provided. The bottom of all openings shall be no higher than one foot above grade. Openings may be equipped with screens, louvers, 5 valves, or other coverings or devices provided that they permit the automatic entry and exit of floodwaters. 6 (ii) Any designs not in conformance with subparagraph (a)(18)(13)(i) of this section, shall be 7 certified by a registered professional engineer or architect and shall conform with FEIVIA 8 Technical Bulletin 1-93, Openings in Foundation Walls. 9 (C) Fully enclosed areas below the lowest floor subject to this provision, include the following: 10 (i) Residential garages placed at or above grade; 11 (ii) Enclosures or vestibules that are attached to structures and that are utilized for storage or entryways; 12 13 (iii) Crawl spaces; and (iv) Outdoor pavilions and patio enclosures with removable walls not located in the high hazard 14 zone. 15 (19) Below Grade Crawl Space Construction: New construction, expansion or enlargement, 16 substantial improvement and substantial modification of any below grade crawl space shall meet the Iollowing requirements: 17 (A) Interior grade elevation that is below the base flood elevation shall be no lower than two feet 18 below the lowest adjacent grade; 19 (B) The height of the below grade crawl space measured from the interior grade of the crawl 20 space to the top of the foundation wall shall not exceed four feet at any point; 21 (C) Adequate drainage systems shall allow floodwaters to drain from the interior area of the crawl space following a flood; and 22 (D) The provisions of paragraphs (a)(2), (a)(3), (a)(4) and (a)(18) of this section shall be 23 complied with. 24 Section 4. Section 9-3-4, BRC 1981 is amended to read: 25 9-3-4 Regulations Governing the Conveyance Zone. 26 In the conveyance zone, the following standards apply: 27 ra) ~^rzi~ Th rv`r"r 1 Sccc .•,ivii n 3 3, "r~cSas r 1oivnavr Tfi'crris .i v rvVernkng the Flondl3larn," BA.4'. 1 Q91 28 Formatted: Right 3:IPW1ParkCen1f311AdnllnlCommun7ca,inn,7W BOard51WRAB1Padcels120)112011-W,,Oritieal Facilities 00P. CM, AX'iticar Pacililies Floodplain Amendments Ordinance 3-I8-2011 doc I Lab) The provisions of section 9-3-5, "Regulations Governing the High Hazard Zone," B.R.C. 2 1981, if the land is also located in the high hazard zone. 3 Lbe) All uses allowed under the provisions of section 9-332_5, "Regulations Governing--the 51n- Year Floodplain," and section 9-3-3. " Rc2nlmion; GIVCrnior,! 1110 1011-Y4ar FIOUdplain.- B.R.C. 4 1981, if they are not prohibited by the underlying zoning district or any ordinance of this city, may be established except that no person shall establish or change any use that results in any rise 5 in the elevation of the one hundred-year flood. 6 (dc) All structures allowed raider section 9-332_5, "Regulations Governing the 500-Year Fooodplain," and secliun 9-3-3. "Regulations Gmernini= the 100-Year Floodnlain.'- B.R.C. 1981, may be established except that no person shall: 8 (1) Place any structure in the conveyance zone that will result in any rise in the elevation of the 9 I one htiRdfed 100-year flood; or 10 (2) Place any obstruction in the conveyance zone, except a device reasonably necessary for flood management if the device is designed and constructed to minimize the potential hazards to life 11 and property. 12 L) No person shall carry out any other development tltit~ istdltithose results in any rise in the 13 elevation of the one-hiki0red I0 !-year flood. (0Localized rises within flood channels or on a specific parcel that is being developed are 14 permissible, if there is no adverse impact on nearby properties and there is no increase in the 15 average water surface elevations along the cross sections of the floodplain. 16 Section 5. Section 9-3-5, BRC 1981 is amended to read: 17 18 9-3-5 Regulations Governing the High Hazard Zone. 19 In the high hazard zone of the floodplain; the following standards apply: 20 -(.t4 , rI«~- ,Ji.li011S 0OVernilig tilt? F100 lPIdiil:" 11.1k.C. 1981. 21 (b) The provis+e~ _ g _ . 198 k if thr lat44t-t o 6L-,iWtl in Iltett~tavc+~tnte tear: 22 (ea) All uses allowed under the provisions of section 9-3-32_5, "Regulations Governing the 500- 23 Year FloodpIain," and section 9-3-3. " ReLulations Governirne the 100-Year 1 loodi lain." B.R.C. 1981, if they are not prohibited by the underlying zoning district or any other ordinance of the 24 city, may be established, except that no person shall: 25 (1) Change the use of an existing structure intended for human occupancy from a nonresidential 26 use to a residential use or use as a school, daycare center, group home, residential care facility, or congregate care facility. 27 (2) Establish any new parking lot for motor vehicles. 28 Formatted: Ngh1 S: 11'WTa,1Cen1ra11Admin\Commu,, calion,'PW Boards\WRABIPaekers1201112011-316-Critical Facilities Ordin,,,:Mtt A-Critical Facilities Floodplain Amendments Ordinance 3.18.2011 doe _li_ 1 (3) Establish any campground. 2 (bd) All structures allowed under the provisions of section 9-342_5, "Regulations Governing the 3 500-Year Floodplain," and section 9-3-3. -RCkLIlMiO115 GON'CruiII2 the 100-Year hloodnlain." S.R.C. 1981, may be established, except that no person shall: 4 (1) Construct or place any new structure intended Ibr human occupancy. 5 (2) Expand, enlarge, or make a substantial modification or substantial improvement to any 6 existing structure intended for human occupancy. Notwithstanding this provision, a person may reconstruct a non-flood-damaged structure or portion thereof, which otherwise does constitute a 7 substantial improvement, under the provisions of subparagraphs 9-3-3(a)(16)(C) and (a)(11 6)(D), 8 I S.R.C. 1981. (e) Unconditioned, unenclosed building elements such as balconies, awnings and roof overhangs 9 may extend up to four feet into the high hazard zone if completely located above the flood I 0 I protection elevation and the remainder of the structure complies with this chapter. 11 Section 6. Section 9-3-6, BRC 1981 is amended to read: 12 9-3-6 Floodplain Development Permits. 13 (a) An applicant for a floodplain development permit shall pay the fee prescribed by section 4- 14 20-44, "Floodplain Development Permits and Flood Control Variance Fees," B.R.C. 1981, and 15 shall complete an application form provided by the city manager that shall include, without limitation, the following: 16 (1) The written consent of the owners of all property subject to the development request; 17 (2) A written statement addressing the criteria for approval; 18 (3) A surface view plan showing elevations and contours of the ground; pertinent structures, till, 19 and storage elevations; sizes, locations, and spatial arrangements of all proposed, anticipated, and existing structures on the site; location and elevations of streets, water supplies and sanitary 20 facilities; and soil types; and 21 (4) Specifications for building construction and materials, filling, dredging, grading, channel 22 improvements and changes, storage of materials, water supply; and sanitary facilities. 23 (b) The manager may require the applicant to furnish additional information and details deemed necessary to evaluate the effects of the proposed construction upon the floodplain, including, 24 without limitation; 25 (1) Valley cross sections showing the floodplain surrounding the watercourse, cross sections of the area to be occupied by the proposed development; and one-hundred500-year or 100-yea 26 r flood maximum water surface elevation information; 27 (2) A profile showing the slope of the bottom of the channel or thalweg of the watercourse; 28 Formatted: Right S.\PW\PerkCentralWdmin\Communialio",IPW .u i1s\WlZAH\Pxckeis\201M101 1-3W-Crideal Facilities OrdinanceIAlt A-Cntical ImInies Floodplain Amendments Ordinance 3-18-2011 doc _ 13 1 (3) A floodplain analysis by a Colorado registered professional engineer of the flood profile, elevation, and velocity, using methodology acceptable to FRMA, including existing and 2 anticipated uses and making a determination that the proposed construction or development will 3 I not cause a rise in the elevation of the water surface of ae*e4+u*dfe41 LO-year flood; 4 (4) A structural analysis by a Colorado registered professional engineer showing that any proposed structures will be adequately designed and constructed to prevent flotation, collapse, or 5 lateral movement of the structure resulting from hydrodynamic and hydrostatic loads, including 6 the effects of buoyancy and scouring. (c) When reviewing an application for a permit, the city manager shall determine which portion or portions of the floodplain are affected by the particular development request and shall then g apply the provisions of sections 9-3-32_5, "Regulations Governing the 500-Year Floodplain," 3-3, "Regulations Govemine the 100-Year Fooodplain. 9-3-4, "Regulations Governing the 9 Conveyance Zone," and 9-3-5, "Regulations Governing the High Hazard Zone," 13,R,C. 1981, as 10 applicable. The manager also shall determine whether the application meets the intent of this chapter prescribed by subsection 9-3-2(a), B.R.C. 1981, after considering the following factors: 11 (1) The effects upon the efficiency or capacity of the conveyance zone and high hazard zone; 12 (2) The effects upon lands upstream, downstream, and in the immediate vicinity, 13 (3) The effects upon the one hundred-year flood profile; 14 (4) The effects upon any tributaries to the main stream, drainage ditches, and any other drainage 15 facilities or systems; 16 (5) Whether additional public expenditures for flood protection or prevention will be required; 17 (6) Whether the proposed use is for human occupancy; 18 (7) The potential danger to persons upstream, downstream, and in the immediate vicinity; 19 (8) Whether any proposed changes in a watercourse will have an adverse environmental effect on 20 the watercourse, including, without limitation, stream banks and streamside trees and vegetation; 21 (9) Whether any proposed water supply and sanitation systems and other utility systems can prevent disease, contamination, and unsanitary or hazardous conditions during a flood; 22 (10) Whether any proposed facility and its contents will be susceptible to flood damage and the 23 effect of such damage; 24 (11) The relationship of the proposed development to the Boulder Valley Comprehensive Plan and any applicable floodplain management programs; 25 (12) Whether safe access is available to the property in times of flood for ordinary and 26 emergency vehicles; 27 (13) Whether the applicant will provide flood warning systems to notify floodplain occupants of 28 impending floods; Formatted: glgilt S ~PWIYarkCenlrallAdminlCommunicalio,sIIW IloardslWRAIIIYackels120 1 112111 1-316-Critical Facilities OrdinanceWlt A-Critical Facilities - Flondplain Amendments Ordinance 3-18-2011 doc 1 (14) Whether the cumulative effect of the proposed development with other existing and 2 anticipated uses will increase flood heights; and 3 (15) Whether the expected heights, velocities, duration, rate of rise, and sediment transport of the floodwaters expected at the site will adversely affect the development or surrounding property. 4 (d) If the city manager determines that the applicant meets the purposes and requirements of this 5 chapter, the manager shall issue the permit and may attach such conditions as deemed necessary to further the purposes of this chapter. 6 (e) A permit issued on or after April 7, 1985, expires three years after its date of issuance, if the permitter has not commenced construction under the permit. The term "commenced 7 construction" shall mean the first placement of permanent construction of a structure on a site, 8 such as the pouring of slabs or footings, the installation of piles, the construction of columns, or any work beyond the stage of excavation; or the placement of a manufactured home on a 9 foundation; but does not include land preparation, grading and filling, or installation of' streets or sidewalks. to 11 (f) No person who has obtained a permit shall fail to construct in accordance with their approved application and design. 12 (g) Floodp` lam development permits that allow for development in the conveyance zone or the 13 high hazard zone, or which will involve a change of watercourse, shall he decided by the city manager. The decision of the city manager shall be subject to call-up by the planning board, or 14 appeal by any aggrieved party to the planning board, subject to the call-up and appeal procedure 15 of section 9-4-4, "Appeals, Call-Ups and Public Ilearings," B.R.C. 1981. 16 (h) A floodplain development permit for any of the following items is effective upon the date of its issuance: 17 (1) Sidewalks, parking lots, or other concrete, asphalt, or stone flatwork that do not modify 18 existing grade; 19 (2) Uninhabited overhead structural projections, no portion of which extends below the flood 20 protection elevation; or (3) Rehabilitation of an existing structure in accordance with the definitions in chapter 9-16, 21 "Definitions," B.R.C. 1981. In addition, for properties in the high hazard zone, the rehabilitation 22 I shall not result in a prohibited change in use as set forth in subsection 9-3-5(bbe-), B.R.C. 1981. 23 (i) No person shall initiate any use after obtaining a permit under this section without first submitting to the city manager a certification by a Colorado registered professional engineer that 24 the development has been completed in compliance with the approved permit application and that all conditions have been fulfilled. 25 lit Applications lily non-residential hplildine permits in tllu 500-vear 1100i1pl:lin shilll indic:uc 26 a hcther or not such t'acility has luvardou~ materials in accordance with the definition in chanter 27 9-16. `-Definitions:' B.K.C. 1981. If hazardous materials. meeting this definition, are present infortnation on the location and snnus of the hazardous laterials, includine information on if thr 28 Formatted: Right S:\l'W114,1Cen.11dmin\Communicakns\PW Bnards1WRAB\1acke1s120l 1\2011-316-Critical Facilities O,dinancAA11 A-Critical Facilities ploodplain Amendments Ordinance 3-18.2011 doc I building is iloodpronl'ed and iI Ih,: 1laiardou. material is sccur%ed such1hat it will not be released 2 at or from the huildine durinc a ';Of)-Year Iood, event must hr provided. 3 Ordinance Nos. 6034 (1998); 7756 (2010) 4 Section 7. Section 9-3-7, BRC 1981 is amended to read: Formatted: Indent Fist line: 0.5" 5 9-3-7 Variances. 6 (a) A person wishing to expand or enlarge an existing structure that does not conform to the requirements of this chapter and cannot be made to conform without unreasonable expense or 7 unreasonable impact on the existing structure may apply to the city manager for a variance from the requirements of subparagraphs 9-3-3(a)(16)(C) and (a)(16)(D), B.R.C. 1981, except that no 8 variance shall be granted for expansion or enlargement of any structure constructed after July 12, 9 1978, unless such expansion or enlargement conforms to the flood protection elevation requirement in effect at the time of the original construction. 10 (b) The city manager shall. not grant a variance under this section unless the manager determines II that: 12 (1) Considering the flood hazard, the variance is the minimum necessary to afford relief; 13 (2) To do so would not result in additional threats to public safety, extraordinary public expense, nuisance, fraud, victimization of the public, or for variances in the conveyance zone a rise in the 14 I elevation of the water surface of ae^100-year flood, or be in conflict with existing 15 provisions of this code or any ordnnancc of the city; and 16 (3) Failure to grant the variance would result in exceptional hardship to the applicant. 17 (c) The manager shall examine the following factors in determining whether or not to grant a variance under this section: 18 (1) The danger to life and property due to flooding or erosion damage; 19 (2) The likelihood that the proposed development, in conjunction with existing and anticipated 20 development, may increase flood hazards; 21 (3) The relationship of the proposed development to the Boulder Valley Comprehensive Plan and 22 any applicable floodplain management programs; and 23 (4) The cost of providing essential services such as maintaining and protecting public utility systems, roads, and bridges during and alter floods. 24 (d) The city manager shall not grant a cumulative total of variances that increases a structure's 25 floor area by more than ten percent of the structure throughout the life of the structure. 26 (e) An applicant for a variance shall apply on forms provided by the city manager and pay the fee prescribed by section 4-20-44, "Floodplain Development Permits and Flood Control Variance 27 Nees," B.R.C. 1981, unless a floodplain development permit is required as well, in which case no 28 fee is required for the variance. Fo►mstted: Right S:1YWlYarkCentralWdminlCommunicationsVPW Board,IWRAB\Packets12011I21111-316-CrilicalFacilitie,Ordinance\An k-CritiwlF~cifilies Fluudplam Amendments Ordinance 3-18-2011 doe - 16 - I (f) Any decision by the city manager to approve a variance is subject to call-up by the planning board or appeal by any aggrieved party to the planning board as described by section 9-4-4, 2 "Appeals, Call-Ups and Public Hearings," B.R.C. 1981. 3 (g) When granting any variance that allows for construction below FEMA's one hundred-year 4 flood protection elevation, the city manager shall provide to the recipient of the variance written notice that the proposed construction does not conform with FF?MA guidelines and that the 5 proposed construction and the original structure may be subject to increased flood insurance 6 premiums. 7 Section 8. Section 9-16-1, BRC 1981 regarding flood regulations is amended to read: 9-16-1 General Definitions 8 (a) The definitions contained in chapter 1-2, "Definitions," B.R.C. 1981, apply to this title unless 9 a term is defined differently in this chapter. 10 (b) Terms identified with the references shown below after the definition are limited to those 11 specific sections or chapters of this title: 12 (1) Airport influence zone (AIZ). 13 (2) Floodplain regulations (Floodplain). 14 (3) Historic preservation (Ilistorie). 15 (4) Inclusionary housing (Inclusionary housing). 16 (5) Residential growth management system (RGMS). 17 (6) Solar access (Solar). 18 (7) Wetlands Protection (Wetlands). 19 (8) Signs (Signs). 20 (c) The following terms as used in this title have the following meanings unless the context 21 clearly indicates otherwise; 22 23 "Area of special flood hazard" means the land in the floodplain subject to a one percent or 24 greater chance of flooding in any given year. Such areas may be designated as Zones A, AO, 25 AE, AC and Al-30 on the FIRM for the City of Boulder. (Floodplain) 26 ~ _It.ia. I"ty+u!ati~+n I ,r.t'il,;~.:' _iit~luth_ti.iiiu+ui Iil,!ji_ I ~~I_-~~Il.+•~I,< i,li~niil iii iy,,G INIIUIAIl Md whook. hr6irrc aW alts school care center, %vith 12 or more students. 27 41,1y,:are &s,nlcrs ~%ilh 12 or mate childreiv zrnuh hmnCs- and a-kitA Iii inTrLwid,:wial or 28 u.)l-.;-~ rr Formatted: Right S:1PWiParkCentrallAdmiMCommunicalionslFW 13oardslWRABIPacketst2011\20t 1-316-Critical Facilities Ordinanc&M, A-Critical Facilities Floodplain Amendments Ordinance3-18.2011 doe I 2"i,,r Ilut~c " i, 11n~ li~ti•,l lul% nr~: .1 nn, 1 l:~r«•Ilt i Ir,:11cc of 1'~im~lllniti•tl +Ir rwtica.lti:~l ill ;ulti cncn 3 ur, I hi: i. the rr+ nLltnrt +tand;trcl nhtl ref.rretl ul a: the "It)tl-ce 1r lhwil." IFooodplain) 4 1!fo_6 to dlicll ll~a~lt~ nrr_i: .ullicilr,xr-d kv_ri,L- 5 G 7 "Basement" means any enclosed area of a building having its lowest floor a minimum of two feet below grade level on all sides. (Floodplain) 8 9 "Change in a watercourse" means any change in an existing thalweg, bed, or bank of a 10 watercourse, (Floodplain) II 12 "Conveyance zone" means those portions of the Floodplain required for the passage or 13 conveyance of the one hundred-year flood based on equal encroachment (measured in volume of 14 water) of the floodplain from the edges of the flood channel to a point where the one hundred- year flood profile will be raised by six inches or more, after considering a reasonable expectation 15 of blockage at bridges and other obstructions by flood borne debris. (Floodplain) 16 17 "Crawl space" means the enclosed area contained inside the foundation walls and below the 18 habitable floor of a structure. Crawl spaces having the lowest floor a minimum of two feet below grade level on all sides shall be considered a basement, and not a crawl space. (Floodplain) 19 "l. rllitisll I aillil~ring Lt~~lln~. 1u~"hl,-h~1 ~ ::ii41,,u1 Iilnit,ly~,l: u~~~ti. ~tlr;!t1i.t>>r„ r.r~.,,~~s,. 20 li,nt~ut Or ct.icc that A Iloodod nrt~ rc:ult iit >c~er4 Slul~cl~uLWItCF to m il"lic llLahh and 21 :tiro v or imerrum essential scraices and opcrutions for the comrnunitt at am time hoore_ durinu ird aria a flood. A critical faeili t is ciassiticd bt the roll(m ine cateeorics- fl) lascnti if 22 Facilities, 121 1l:,;lydous Materials Facilities. (3) ;11-risk llom lations facilities. 23 'J- 24 25 "Development" means any change to improved or unimproved real estate, including, without 26 limitation, constructing, relocating, rehabilitating, reconstructing or expanding or enlarging (but not maintaining) a building or other structure or portion thereof, or establishing or changing a 27 use, or mining, dredging, filling, grading, paving, or excavation. (Floodplain) 28 Formatted: Right , "WlPadeCentra", inlCommuni""ions'PW Boards\WRABIf'ackets120t I120ll -316-Critical Facilities OrdinancelAtt A-Critical Facilities Floodplain Amendments Ordinance 3-18.2011 doe • I8- I ' i'S,scntlal Ser%lcc.i Include. y 111,111 IIIIi'I,IiIUII i'lllrllL . ~lllwlL;C L~ :!I,L:l 2 nl,alical. desisnatC(1 CrnerlLenc+ Shelters- ronlnlun'rcalion,. 11uhlic ulilin wllant racilities and Tj"1iptnent. and 7overnmenl operations. 11 loodolain 3 The ~,It~-1,91C OPI~s 111 csse.niial servicos lacllliles can be hlrther defined as: Formatted: Font: 12 pt, No underline, Not 4 Public ,,Uet% (Police st.111on.. tiro -Ind rescue stations. enlelt'cnca nneratioll renlcrsl Highlight 1 nlorecuc~ rcuollsr lenlcr±enc+ +ehicle and cquinmi•rn sutirace and esscnti:fi Formatted: Bullets and Numbering - 5 ,%vcrnmenlul %%ork centers for coptinuit% of government once iionsl 6 1 1l rt:onCV' medical (hospitals. cnlirgency carv_ urgent care. ambulance scrn ices but 7 %Ajdhi- clinics. dl!e~IorSOI'fices, ;111(1 nn11-ur~_'ent care medical tacilitieS 11rN~itnwled cnletueoc% ,heltcr, 8 +.tnnmunieatinn, 1nR1in hubs for telephone, wain broadca lhns: «luipmem Cor 9 1:levision s%slctns. radio and other eineraencv warnim: svstcnts but cxcludin2 to+lcrs. lines_ cables, and conduits( 10 I'ublie ulilit+ plant facilities and osscntial equipment liar treatment, govicration. I I 1kWagc. popguns and disirlblllion (hubs for +%ater. '%astoltiater, po+ver and -as but ,~%Cluditlu hadro cleclrie lileilitics. tut+c!s. Po ICS. 1)(mer lines, buried oiPelincs, 12 IransmiStiiorl lints. di,Iribution lines. and service lines) 13 • I-Ssenlial eoyVI-11e11ont olleranons tpnllHe rect rdi. conrls, wails. btllldim! I+crll11t11112.1k _I' Formatted: Normal, Justified, Indent: Left: 0.5", Line spacing: Multiple 1.15 11, Bulleted + 14 IIYSpeCtlOtt at'I'+`iC'C "_'r rl e!'nnicnl :ai11lilli±tl dir,ll and 141x1)1 elt1C111, nl'ti11€Cn;mCe ;111d Level: l+Aligned at: 1.5"+Indent at: 1.75" C ulyirl4111Celycl !Formatted: Bullets and Numbering 15 . Air Transponation lilclinev (airports (municinal and larger). helicopter pads and Formatted: Font: 12 pt 16 Structures servine ernerecncl' Function,;, and associated illrraslrtlcture (aviation Formatted: Font: 12 pt, Not Italic control to~sers_ air traffic control Ce11lCI'S. Sn(1 ellter! C11C~' e(11Iip!11enI alt'CI'a1) hangars). Formatted: Indent: Left: 0.5 Bulleted + 17 Level: 1 + Aligned at: 1.5" + Indent at: 1.75" Formatted: Font: 12 pt 18 Formatted: Font: 12 pt, No underline, Not 'ighlight 19 "Exceptional hardship" means a substantially disproportionate burden in relationship to the H 20 benefit to be derived from conformance with the requirements of this title. (Floodplain) 21 22 "Existing manufactured home park or subdivision" means a manufactured home park for which the construction of facilities for servicing the lots on which the manufactured homes are to be 23 affixed (including, at a minimum, the installation of utilities, the construction of streets, and 24 either final site grading or the pouring of concrete pads) was completed prior to July 12, 1978. 25 (Floodplain) 26 27 "Expansion or enlargement of a structure" means any addition of an exterior wall to the structure or any addition to the floor area of the structure, whether under, at, or above grade, and whether 28 or not the external dimensions of the structure are changed, or the reconstruction of a flood- Formatted: Right S:tIIW.Pa,ICentraMdmin\Communica,iunlPW BoardslWRAHIPac1c1,12U1112(111-111-Critical Facilities Ordina-e 111 A-Critical Facilities Floodplain Amendments Ordinance 3-18-2011 doc _ 1 n I damaged portion of a structure, so long as such expansion, enlargement or reconstruction does 2 not constitute a "substantial modification" or a "substantial improvement." (Floodplain) 3 "Expansion to existing manufactured home park or subdivision" means the preparation of additional sites by the construction of facilities for servicing the lots on which the manufactured 4 homes are to be affixed (including, without limitation, the installation of utilities, the 5 construction of streets, final site grading, or the pouring of concrete pacts). (Floodplain) 6 7 TEMA" means the Federal Emergency Management Agency. (Floodplain) 8 . 9 "I iN c hundred-vcar hood" means a hood havine a 0.2 percent chance of oecurrinc in am vear. 10 (Floodplain) 11 "Flood" or "flooding" means a general or temporary condition of partial or complete inundation of normally dry land areas from a watercourse that temporarily overflows the boundaries within 12 which it is ordinarily confined or from the rapid accumulation of runoff of surface water caused 13 by rain, snow melt, flow blockage, or any other source. (Floodplain) 14 "Flood channel" means a natural or artificial watercourse with a definite bed and banks which periodically or continuously conducts flowing water and is shown on the Flood Channel 15 Inventory Map prepared by the city's Utility Division of the Public Works Department. 16 (Floodplain) 17 "Flood fringe" means those portions of the floodplain that are not in the conveyance zone or in 18 the high hazard zone. (Floodplain) 19 "Flood Insurance Rate Map (FIRM)" means the official map on which FEMA has delineated both the areas of special flood hazard and the risk premium zones applicable to the community. 20 (Floodplain) 21 "Flood insurance study (FIS)" means the official report provided by the Federal Emergency 22 Management Agency that included flood profiles, the Flood Boundary-Floodway Map, and the water surface elevations of the base flood. (Floodplain) 23 "Flood profile" means a graph showing the clevations of the floodwater surface and the 24 elevations of the underlying land as a function of distance along a path of flow. (Floodplain) 25 "Flood protection elevation" means an elevation of: 1) two feet above the elevation of the water 26 surface of a one hundred-year flood as determined pursuant to sections 9-3-2 through 9-3-8, B.R.C. 1981, or, if no such elevation is determined, two feet above the highest grade adjacent to 27 a structure, or 2) two Net above the base flood elevation in AE zones or two feet above the flood 28 Formatted: Right 1:1PW1ParkCentralW1minlCommunicatio mll`W_Boards\WRAB1Packecs10 1 112 01 1 3t6-fritical Faclives Ordi,wceWl A-Crikal Facilities Floodplain Amendments Ordinance 3-18-2011 doe -20-/ I depth number indicated for AO zones on the FIRM for the City of Boulder, whichever is higher. 2 (Floodplain) 3 "Floodplain" means the area that is inundated by a flood. (Floodplain) 4 "Floodplain development permit" means any permit granted under the terms and conditions of sections 9-3-2 through 9-3-8, B.R.C. 1981, for development on land in a floodplain. (Floodplain)"Floodplain, five hundred-year" means the area inundated by a flood having a 0.2 6 percent or greater chance of occurrin in any given year. Flood lain in"'o g Y' P ) 7 "Floodplain, one hundred-year" means the area inundated by a flood having a one percent or 8 greater chance of occurring in any given year. (Floodplain) 9 "Floodproofing" means any combination of structural and nonstructural changes, modifications, 10 or adjustments to structures or real property which reduce or eliminate flood damage to improved or unimproved real property, water and sanitary facilities, structures and their contents. I f (Floodplain) 12 "Floodway, FEMA regulatory" means the channels of watercourses and the adjacent land areas 13 that must be reserved in order to discharge the base flood without cumulatively increasing the water surface elevation more than one foot. (Floodplain) 14 15 I lazardous ,Materials" are am materials used. generated. or stored at a racilin• ol'a type and in a Formatted: Font: 12 pt 16 quanlily [fiat would cl,tssili° the facility as a I Lizardous !materials I-'acililc. I1 loudplain] Formatted: Fant: !2 pt 17 1lazordous Mates ink ]luildinc" is am Structure on a 1lazardous Materiais Facility in tyhieh 18 I lozardous Materials titre used. lreneroted or stored. (f lOodplainj Formattca: Font. 12 pt Id?2a F'{1,gat;--SkIt,:istnEc-++Fti+ti:-il I:.0111 li'r'rsa-ii; 19 t+++4EF+'a+f Hf~ltiitiE°tC+N ~Etrl~ +taftlcir3'_}itkldlofkt, gFalitat1-E#1~trtiKe~'eelGr .-T(i-). BA--k. 1)81. Mat 20 i F4+t+n€m3iik tt+elit~ ie;+Fr lets i~r etik i~t-te+xF tltat+rr t++++e~ +lr,cli+ er}+ I tai relr+ticv! +a +11 iiy it-ri?-cln.tl ti it i~ ~t,3-!~-laatan l~Fl-t.-t li+u+}a+a;.~at,ia+an l,.-tat--}tl ant-li 6t-.-14~4,>iatit~lailt-l 21 22 'Hazardous Material Facilities" include the following; 23 m 1 acililies sgihject to Section 303 of the IanLrgeney 111annin-,r and Community RiLlti _to- 24 hnm% Aci. d2 1 iSC § 11003. herlusc thc~ have on rile nn "1'.x11.enich I laz:udtrtl; tiulr uit>i in ryas, of the "Threshold Plonnint Ouantitie " estahjkllod by the t [pilaf Stale 25 1-1i1 it nmental Protection Aecno and lkicd ai •111 ('I'R Pnri 355- Appendix A and Appendix R. 26 ht 1 laid, co%cred hr subpart (n)above. facilities storinf-I I k6larkJOU' hucrial as defined by 15rp;lrtntcnt of"Frlnsporiatioll re2ulaticm; al -19 CPR llorts 17 1 - 180 But on1r to tltc extent 27 thal the facilits is :-lorin:: tht llazr irdotu, Mawrial ill 01C'11LOk Pat:02iW!" C41111aincr in 28 %Oich it %%as delivered as that term is defined at 49 C:FR 171.8. Formatted: Right S \P WV'arkCenvallAdminlCommunica,ion,IPW BoardslWRABIPackc1,12(11112,111-316•Crilical Facililics Or1inanc6A11 A,Iritical Facilities ` Floodplain Amendments Ordinance 3-18-201) doc I t I I ociIiIir st Irim_ :I 11.1/CIr,10tl: 5llhctallcC of the T%PC Mill Lit ion IiIics Iisicd h% 2<,1-22-107 C.R.S. 2 d I:aciIitics rcc-'ulated dS trdnSlCr stations under Colorado hazardous waste reeuIations at 6 3 CCR 1007-3. Part 263. (Floodplain) 4 "High hazard zone" means those portions of the floodplain where an unacceptably high hazard to 5 human safety exists defined as those areas where the product number of flow velocity (measured in ft./sec.) times flow depth (measured in feet) equals or exceeds four, or where flow depths 6 equal or exceed four feet. (Floodplain) 7 8 "Intended for human occupancy" means, as applied to strictures, capable of and likely to be used 9 for residential habitation, or for commercial, industrial or governmental occupation by persons 10 on a regular basis. Examples of structures normally not intended for human occupancy include, without limitation, garages useable solely for the parking of vehicles or Storage, open air l 1 carwasheS, unheated pavilions, porches or patio covers, crawl spaces, flood resistant enclosures 12 useable solely for building access, barns and other agricultural buildings, garden storage sheds, ATMs, and mausoleums. (Floodplain) 13 14 "Lowest floor" means the lowest floor of the lowest enclosed area (including basement or crawl 15 space). An unfinished or flood resistant enclosure, usable solely for parking oI'vehicles, building 16 access or storage, in an area other than a basement area, is not considered a building's lowest floor, provided that such enclosure is not built so as to render the structure in violation of the 17 applicable design requirements of sections 9-3-2 through 9-3-8, B.R.C. I981. (Floodplain) 18 19 "Maintenance" means any activity undertaken to repair or prevent the deterioration, impairment 20 or failure of any stream, previously constructed improvement or structure including, without limitation: the removal of sediment and debris, installation of erosion and sediment control 21 devices and the replacement of structural components. Maintenance does not include substantial 22 modifications, substantial improvements, total replacement of existing facilities or total reconstruction of a facility. (Floodplain) 23 24 25 "Manufactured home" means a structure, transportable in one or more sections, which is built on a permanent chassis and is designed for use with or without a permanent foundation when 26 connected to the required utilities. The term "manufactured home" does not include a 27 "recreational vehicle." (Floodplain) 28 Formatted; Right S:S'N'\ParkCentral~AdminlCommunicationslPW 11oards\wRABIIacke,,1201112111 I-V,-Crilieal facilities Ordlna"ce\AII A-Critical Facilities Floodplain Amendments Ordinance 3-I8-2011 doe - 22 . I "Manufactured horne park or manufactured home subdivision" means any lot or tract of land 2 designed, used, or intended to provide a location or accommodation for one or more manufactured homes and upon which any manufactured home or homes are parked or located, 3 whether or not the lot or tract or any part thereof is held or operated for profit, on which 4 construction was completed on or after July 12, 1978. (Floodplain) 5 ' 6 - Mobik ptlpulaliLln facility" illcanN lintels, motek, dormitories, hrd and hltakfusts hostcly cls t l_g1:k.i in tllr Bouldrl R,:% ;,I t;cl and asscmblk LrOLII1 11.e. as dcllllad in the Oil's adopted 7 version of the International Building Code. (Floodplain) 8 9 "Moveable object" means an item or material not anchored to the ground that is subject to being 10 transported by water, including, without limitation, a manufactured home not anchored to a permanent foundation, a tank, a trash dumpster, lumber, and other materials, but not a motor 11 vehicle. (Floodplain) 12 13 "New construction" means structures for which the "start of construction" commenced on or alter 14 July 12, 1978, and includes any subsequent improvements to such structures. (Floodplain) 15 "New manufactured home park or subdivision" means a manufactured home park or subdivision 16 for which the construction of facilities for servicing the lots on which the manufactured homes are to be affixed (including, at a minimum, the installation of utilities, the construction df streets, 17 final site grading, or pouring of concrete pads) is completed on or after July 12, 1978. 18 (Floodplain) 19 "Nonresidential structure" means any structure or any portion of a structure used exclusively for, or designed as and capable of being used for, office, commercial, industrial, or governmental 20 occupation. (Floodplain) 21 22 "Obstruction" means any item or material not constituting a moveable object in, along, across, or 23 projecting into the floodplain that might impede, retard, or change the direction of a flow of 24 water, either by itself or by catching or collecting debris carried by such water, in a way that the city manager determines would increase the flood hazard to adjacent properties. (Floodplain) 25 26 "One hundred-year flood" means a flood having a one percent chance of occurring in any year, 27 (Floodplain) 28 Formatted: Right S.IPW\ParkCentralUdmirilCornmunicationslPW B0ardslWIIIIIPacke1s12 01 1101 1-316-Critical Facilities Ordinanc AAIIA-Critical Facilities Floodplain Amendments Ordinance.1-18-2011 doe _23 I "Reconstruction" means exact replacement of an existing structure or portion thereof or exact 2 structural repair of a damaged structure. (Floodplain) 3 "Recreational vehicle" means a vehicle which is: 1) built on a single chassis; 2) four hundred square feet or less when measured at the largest horizontal projections; 3) designed to be self- 4 propelled or permanently towable by a light duty truck; and 4) designed primarily not for use as 5 a permanent dwelling but as temporary living quarters for recreational, camping, travel, or seasonal use. (Floodplain) 6 7 "Rehabilitation" means any improvement; maintenance, or remodeling made to the.interior or 8 exterior of any existing structure or the reconstruction of a deteriorated or non-flood-damaged q portion of an existing structure so long as such improvement or reconstruction does not constitute an "expansion or enlargement of a structure," "substantial modification," or a 10 "substantial improvement." (Floodplain) 11 12 Residential structure" means any structure or any portion of a structure that is used for, or 13 designed as and capable of being used for, the temporary or permanent domicile of persons, 14 including, without limitation, a dwelling, a boarding house, a hotel, a motel, and similarly used structures. (Floodplain) 15 16 "Start of construction" means the date the huilding permit was issued, provided the actual start of 17 construction, repair, reconstruction, rehabilitation, addition, placement, or other improvement 18 was within one hundred eighty days of the permit date. The actual start means either the first placement of permanent construction of' a structure on a site such as the pouring of slab or 19 footings, the installation of piles, the construction of columns, or any work beyond the stage of 20 excavation; or the placement of 'a manufactured home on a foundation. (Floodplain) 21 22 "Structure" means a building or other roofed construction, a basement, a wall, a fence, a 23 manufactured home, or a storage tank. (Floodplain) 24 - 25 "Substantial damage" means damage of any origin sustained by a structure whereby the cost of restoring the structure to its before-damaged condition would equal or exceed fifty percent of the 26 market value of the structure before the damage occurred. (Floodplain) 27 "Substantial improvement" means any repair, reconstruction, rehabilitation, addition, or 28 improvement of a structure, the cost of which equals or exceeds fifty percent of the market value Formatted: Right s:1PWU'arkCentralV, n\COmnluni'allomTW BoardslWRAB\Paekets120t112011-316-Crilieal Facilities drdinancM A-Critical Facilities Floodplain Amendments Ordinance 3.18-2011 doc -24 I of the structure before the "start of construction" of the improvement. This term includes 2 structures which have incurred "substantial damage," regardless of the actual repair work performed, For the purposes of this definition, "substantial improvement" is considered to occur 3 when the first alteration of any wall, ceiling, floor, or other structural part of the building 4 commences, whether or not that alteration affects the external dimensions of the structure. The term does not, however, include either: 1) any project for improvement of a structure to comply 5 with existing state or local health, sanitary, or safety code specifications which are solely necessary to assure safe living conditions or 2) any alteration of a structure listed on the National 6 Register of Historic Places or the Colorado Inventory of Historic Places or designated as an 7 individual landmark under section 9-11-2, "City Council May Designate Or Amend Landmarks 8 And Historic Districts," B.R.C. 1981. (Floodplain) 10 "Substantial modification" means any expansion or enlargement of a structure which equals or exceeds fifty percent of the floor area of the structure intended for human occupancy, considered 1 1 cumulatively, commencing July 12, 1978. (Floodplain) 12 13 Section 9. This ordinance is necessary to protect the public health, safety and welfare of 14 the residents of the city, and covers matters of local concern. 15 Section 10. The City Council deems it appropriate that this ordinance be published by 16 title only and orders that copies of this ordinance be made available in the office of the City 17 18 Clerk for public inspection and acquisition. 19 20 21 22 23 24 INTRODUCED, READ ON FIRST READING, AND ORDERED PUBLISHED BY 25 TITLE ONLY this -day of 2011. 26 27 Mayor 28 Attest: Formatted: Right S:U'W\PurkCentral~.4dmin\Commu"icationslPW BoardslA~RAD\Packets12011~2U11.3\6-CriticaV Facili[ies OrdinancelAtt A-Critical facilities Floodplain Amendments Ordinance 3-18-2011 due _l5 1 2 City Clerk on behalf oi'the 3 Director of Finance and I ecord 4 READ ON SEVOND READING, PASSED. ADOPTED, AND 01MERED 5 P[;1WISHED BY TITLE ONLY this day of 2011. 6 7 14a+'nr 9 :ltlcst: 10 11 City Clerk on behalf of the 12 Director of Finance and Record 13 File: FCAD1190 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 Formatted: R1ghl 5'PA'Purf:Central'vldnnd:Camnuin~enunnsV'N' Efoatdsl\VRAElFackets~'_611d411-3''h-C'emrnl Fncdities OedmenciAn r\-Cnucnl Faciliucs Fkwdplmn .4modmcnts Oidmancc 1.18-2011 d" 26 Attachment C for Attachment A CITY OF BOULDER Department of Public Works/Utilities Division Planning and Project Management f PO Box 791 ►iR 1739 Broadway l~ 10 Boulder, CO 80306 (303) 441-3266 (303) 441-4271 FAX WPA13.1anuaj-v 20, 2011 Meetinp, Feedback or Questions with Response and Additional Research: 1. What types of public outreach have been completed and what more can be done? As of the January 20, 2011 Water Recourses Advisory Board Public Hearing outreach for the critical facilities and mobile population ordinance included: • October 2009 meeting with the Local Emergency Planning Committee (LEPC) (The LEPC is an emergency planning organization comprised of local businesses and government emergency planning and response organizations.) • March 2010 meeting with the Local Emergency Planning Committee • July 2010 meeting with the Boulder Chamber of Commerce • August 2011 A project website was developed for the proposed ordinance • August 2010 "Protecting `Critical' Buildings" front page article in the Boulder Daily Camera • August 2010 Open House: I . Invitations were sent to potential critical facilities and mobile population facilities. 2. Boulder Daily Camera article included information on time and location of open house. 3. Boulder Chamber of Commerce included infon-nation on open house time, location and content in their monthly news letter. 4. Information on the open house was included on the project website and city websites. • October 2010 meeting with the Boulder Chamber of Commerce • January 2011 Water Resources Advisory Board Public Hearing: 1. Invitations were sent to potential critical facilities and mobile population facilities. 2. The Boulder Chamber of Commerce was given information on Water Resources Advisory Board public hearing time, location and content. Attachment B for Attachment A Attachment B: January 20, 2011 Critical Facilities and Mobile Populations WRAB Memo (please see memo at this link - Agenda Item 5: littp://rv-,N,w.boulder•colorado.~_ov/index.php'?option=cotn_content&task=vievv& id= I X12 14 &Itemid=2330 3. Information on the Water Resources Advisory Board Public Hearing was included on the project website and city websites. Since the January 2011 Water Resources Advisory Board Public Hearing the following additional public outreach has been completed: • February 2011- Public outreach (Facility managers at 28 potential hazardous materials facilities were contacted by phone. They were told about the proposed ordinance, the hazardous materials definition and project website. Staff answered their questions and gave them contact information for additional follow up) • February 2011 Controversy and Consensus Channel 8 TV show (The topic of this months recurring episode was the proposed critical facilities and mobile population ordinance) • March 2011 Water Resources Advisory Board Public Hearing: 1. Invitations were sent to potential critical facilities and mobile population facilities. 2. The Boulder Chamber of Commerce was given information on Water Resources Advisory Board public hearing time, location and content. 3. Information on the Water Resources Advisory Board Public Hearing was included on the project website and city websites. 4. Email invitations where sent to people who requested electronic notification on the proposed ordinance. 2. Can staff provide an economic analysis on the proposed ordinance? An economic analysis of the proposed ordinance is summarized in the March 28, 2011 Water Resources Advisory Board Critical Facilities and Mobile Population Ordinance memo and the full analysis is included as an attachment. 3. Is the language of the hazardous materials ordinance causing a drag net which will result in more facilities being included? The proposed hazardous materials definition was written to regulate facilities with large amounts (typically more then 120 gallons) of hazardous materials in the city's floodplains. The reason that the proposed definition, which is taken from the Colorado Statute, US Department of Transportation hazardous materials definition, or the Federal Emergency Management and Community Right-to-Know Act, does not distinguish between large and small businesses is that it's the chemicals that are dangerous and there is nothing about the size of the business that makes those chemicals more or less dangerous. There is no reason to believe that a quantity of hazardous material in a pile of flood debris is less dangerous to rescue workers because if it came from a small business. 4. Does the duration of flood inundation affect the cost of recovery? The National Flood Insurance Program's website (www.floodsmart.gov) contains a flood damage estimator that calculates flood repair costs based on the depth of flooding at a given building. For a two thousand square foot residential building subject to 3 feet of flooding, flood recovery costs will include: • Cleaning $4,100 • Repair of doors, windows $2,150 • Electrical and plumbing repairs $3,320 • Carpet and wood flooring replacement $15,870 • Repair to interior wall finishes $1,920 • Drywall and wall insulation or paneling replacement $3,310 • Kitchen and Bath Cabinets $6,100 • Appliance repair/replacement $4,200 • Computer, TV and Electronics Replacement $3,500 • Repairs to HVAC $2,200 • Furniture replacement (living room, table and chairs) $6,000 In reviewing these costs it is apparent that that depth of flooding and building materials (masonry walls vs. dry wall or concrete floors vs. carpet) will impact the cost of recovery but for the most part length of flood inundation (2 days or 2 weeks) will not. Drywall, carpet, electronics, furniture, etc that is immersed in contaminated and muddy floodwater for even 2 days will still need to be repaired, replaced, or cleaned. 5. What would be the impact of the ordinance on a daycare facility in a 500-year floodplain? A brand new daycare facility would have to comply with the regulations by providing protection to the 500-year water surface elevation (WSEL) plus one foot of freeboard. Existing facilities will be grandfathered and can continue to operate in their existing configuration. If an existing facility proposes a modification that will be less the 50% of the value of the existing building or represent less then a 50% increase in square footage the proposed addition will need to be built with flood protection to the 500-year WSEL plus one foot of freeboard. If a larger expansion or remodel is proposed the entire facility will be protected to the 500-year WSEL plus one foot of freeboard. 6. Since the national guidance on protecting critical facilities comes from the National Flood Insurance Program's (NFIP) Community Rating System, are critical facilities regulation required for compliance with the NFIP? At this point in time the NFIP's Community Rating Systems recommends protection of critical facilities to a 500-year flood level. Adherence to this recommendation is not required to be in compliance with the NFIP. However, the federal government is in the process of evaluating updates to the NFIP and its regulations and requiring protection of critical facilities to a 500-year level is currently being evaluated as part of that process. l i. v 4p BdJ4 CITY OF BOULDER CITY COUNCIL AGENDA ITEM MEETING DATE: Aug. 21, 2012 AGENDA TITLE Consideration of a motion to accept the May 29, 2012, study session summary on floodplain management. PRESENTERS Jane S. Brautigam, City Manager Paul J. Fetherston, Deputy City Manager Maureen Rait, Executive Director of Public Works Jeff Arthur, Director of Public Works for Utilities Bob Harberg, Utilities Engineering Project Management Coordinator Annie Noble, Greenways Coordinator Kurt Bauer, Engineering Project Manager Christie Coleman, Engineering Project Manager Katie Knapp, Floodplain & Wetlands Administrator EXECUTIVE SUMMARY This agenda item provides a summary of the May 29, 2012, City Council study session on floodplain management for the City of Boulder. The purpose of the study session was to provide City Council with a background on the city's flood risk and to update council on key projects related to floodplain management in the coming year. The following questions guided council's discussion: 1. Does City Council have any questions about the city's flood risk or its existing floodplain regulations? 2. Does City Council have any questions about the city's proposed floodplain regulations involving critical facilities and mobile populations? 3. Does City Council have any questions about the Boulder Creek floodplain mapping study, South Boulder Creek flood mitigation study, or the planning effort for the Boulder Civic Area? Packet page number 48 Agenda Item 3F t During the study session, City Council expressed a variety of concerns about the proposed critical facilities and mobile populations ordinance. Submittal of the study session summary has been delayed to allow more thorough evaluation of potential next steps prior to City Council consideration. STAFF RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends approval of the summary of the May 29, 2012, study session on floodplain management. Suggested Motion Language Staff requests council consideration of this matter and action in the form of the following motion: Motion to accept the study session summary from May 29, 2012, included in this agenda item as Attachment A. NEXT STEPS Floodplain Management • A comprehensive review of floodplain and flood safety outreach activities will be conducted prior to spring 2013. Key considerations will include the elimination of ineffective or outdated programs, increasing the use of video and social media, and increasing the availability of real-time data. • A City Council tour of the Fourmile Canyon fire burn area has been scheduled for Aug. 23, 2012, from 3 to 5 p.m. Critical Facilities and Mobile Populations Ordinance • Staff is currently modifying the proposed ordinance to address concerns raised by City Council and the public. A key focus area is narrowing both the actual and perceived scope of the regulations. This includes reducing the emphasis on the 500- year floodplain and the potential removal of some land and property uses from the proposed regulations. • Staff will continue to involve the public in the ordinance development process, including meetings with the Boulder Chamber, Water Resources Advisory Board and Planning Board, prior to returning to City Council. Boulder Creek Floodplain Mapping Study • Staff is currently working with Boulder County and FEMA to finalize an approach to address property owners' concerns with the portion of the study downstream of city limits. It is anticipated that the study will be forwarded for City Council consideration in the 3`d Quarter of 2012. South Boulder Creek Flood Mitigation Study Packet page number 49 Agenda Item V 2 • Staff is collaborating with key stakeholders to determine potential flood mitigation options. A public process that includes meetings with the Water Resources Advisory Board, the Ten Space Board of Trustees, and Planning Board will be scheduled during the 4` Quarter of 2012. City Council consideration is tentatively scheduled for the I" Quarter of 2013. Multi-Hazard Mitigation Plan Update • The city is required to update its Multi-Hazard Mitigation Plan every five years. The Plan was first adopted in 2008 and the first update is due in 2012. A draft update has been prepared and a public workshop will be conducted in September 2012. The draft update will be submitted for state and federal review in October 2012 and the final version will be presented to City Council in early 2013. Boulder Civic Area • No proposed changes to existing floodplain regulations or policies were identified during the study session. BACKGROUND The background information for this topic can be found in the study session memo. ATTACHMENTS Attachment A - May 29, 2012, Study Session Summary on Floodplain Management. Packet page number 50 Agenda Item 3F 3 ATTACHMENT A Study Session Summary - May 29, 2012 Floodplain Management PRESENT: City Council: Mayor Matt Appelbaum, Deputy Mayor Lisa Morzel, Ken Wilson, Suzy Ageton, KC Becker, Macon Cowles, George Karakehian, Suzanne Jones, Tim Plass City Staff: Jane Brautigam; City Manager, Paul Fetherston; Deputy City Manager, Maureen Rait; Executive Director of Public Works, Jeff Arthur; Director of Public Works for Utilities, Bob Harberg; Utilities Engineering Project Management Coordinator, Kurt Bauer; Engineering Project Manager, Christie Coleman; Engineering Project Manager, Katie Knapp; Floodplain & Wetlands Administrator PURPOSE: The objective of this study session was to provide City Council with a background of the city's flood risk and to update council on some key floodplain management projects for the coming year. PRESENTATION OVERVIEW: Staff presented an overview of the city's floodplain management program and explained how it is designed to mitigate the risks of flooding, minimize loss of life and property damage, and support recovery following a major flood event. The presentation also outlined some key projects scheduled for City Council consideration in the next year including; updating mapping of the Boulder Creek floodplain, a mitigation plan for the South Boulder Creek floodplain, additional regulations related to critical facilities and mobile populations, and discussion around the Civic Center Master Plan. COUNCIL RESPONSES TO STUDY SESSION QUESTIONS: Council had a wide ranging discussion while answering the following questions: 1. Does City Council have any questions about the city's flood risk or its existing floodplain regulations? 2. Does City Council have any questions about the city's proposed floodplain regulations involving critical facilities and mobile populations? 3. Does City Council have any questions about the Boulder Creek floodplain mapping study, South Boulder Creek mitigation study, or the planning effort for the civic center area? DISCUSSION SUMMARY: • The council expressed concerns about sediment and debris flow in the Fourmile Canyon Creek as a result of the 2010 Fourmile Fire. Packet page number 51 Agenda Item 3F 4 • There was some concern relating to the current description of flood risk and how it is perceived by the public. (A 100-year flood event is not as comprehensible to a lay person as a 3" rain storm in regards to relative, real-time understanding.) • There were questions surrounding the city's flood class and how to improve it to Class 5 status. Would the points needed to obtain a Class 5 rating be accomplished through the city's critical facilities ordinance? • There was some concern about the financial burden, particularly for non-profits and small businesses, to comply with the proposed critical facility and mobile population ordinance. • There was some concern about current regulations relating to rebuilding after a 500-year flood event and whether or not the city should allow for rebuilding of critical facilities in the 500-yr floodplain. • There was some support for more leniency within the 500-year floodplain and allowing structural flood protection for both commercial and residential structures. There was some concern about the complexity and vagueness of definitions for critical facilities and the proposed regulatory provisions. • There was a request to identify specific structures that would be affected by the proposed regulations. • There were questions and concerns about the city using both the 100-year and 500-year floodplains and whether or not the city needs to go that far. Incentives for property owners just outside the 100-year floodplain may be considered.. • There were concerns about the relative risk of the 500-year flood vs. other natural hazards risks. The Multi-Hazard Mitigation Plan may help to inform this issue. • There was interest in finding other avenues for the city to incorporate and inform the community of the very real danger of flood risk. Perhaps more public outreach is needed to get the word out and discover what the community's priorities are surrounding floodplain management. • There was general agreement of support for moving forward with the Boulder Creek Flood Mapping Study. • There was general agreement of support for floodplain mapping assumptions for the Civic Center Plan. Packet page number 52 Agenda Item 3F 5 Attachment C Facilities Potentially Needing Flood Protection NAME ADDRESS Type Creek 75th St WWTP 4045 N 75TH ST Essential Services Boulder Creek Alterra Villas at the Atrium 3350 30th St At-risk Population Wonderland Creek American Medical Response 3800 Pearl St Essential Services Goose Creek Boulder Community Foothills Hospital 4747 Arapahoe Ave Essential Services Boulder Creek Boulder County Clerk and Recorder 1750 33rd St Essential Services Boulder Creek Boulder County Head Start 2675 Mapleton Ave At-risk Population Goose Creek Boulder County Head Start (Martin Park) 3650 Martin Dr At-risk Population Bear Canyon Creek Boulder County Justice Center (CJC) 1777 6th St Essential Services Boulder Creek Boulder Fire Station 5 436519th St. Essential Services Fourmile Canyon Creek Boulder Fire Station 7 1380 55th St Essential Services South Boulder Creek Boulder Sheriff 5600 Flatiron Parkway Essential Services Boulder Creek Canyon Pointe Housing 700 Walnut St At-risk Population Boulder Creek Columbine Elementary School 3130 Repplier St At-risk Population Twomile Canyon Creek Comcast 3250 Walnut St Hazardous Materials Boulder Creek Eisenhower Elementary School 1220 EISENHOWER DR At-risk Population South Boulder Creek First Presbyterian Church 1820 15TH ST At-risk Population Boulder Creek Homestar Child Development Center 3280 Dartmouth Ave At-risk Population Bear Canyon Creek McGregor's Garden Preschool 3535 Eastman Ave At-risk Population Bear Canyon Creek Montessori Education Center of the Rockies 4745 Walnut St At-risk Population Boulder Creek Mountain Morning Preschool 1286 Sumac Ave At-risk Population Wonderland Creek New Horizons Cooperative Preschool 1825 Upland Ave At-risk Population Fourmile Canyon Creek Police Annex 1500 Pearl St Essential Services Boulder Creek Public Safety Building 1805 33rd St Essential Services Boulder Creek Rallysport Health Club Day Care 2727 29th St At-risk Population Elmers Twomile Creek REGIONAL TRANSPORTATION DISTRICT 1707 EXPOSITION DR Essential Services Boulder Creek Corden Pharma 2075 55th St Hazardous Materials South Boulder Creek SEPTEMBER SCHOOL 1902 WALNUT ST At-risk Population Boulder Creek SEPTEMBER SCHOOL (auditorium) 1833 19th St At-risk Population Boulder Creek Shining Mountain Waldorf School 1179 UNION AV At-risk Population Fourmile Canyon Creek Sunflower Preschool 3340 Dartmouth At-risk Population Bear Canyon Creek Tiny Minders Day Care 3685 Martin Dr At-risk Population Bear Canyon Creek U.S. WEST COMMUNICATIONS (QWEST) 1545 Walnut St Essential Services Boulder Creek Xcel Boulder Terminal 2500 28th St Essential Services Goose Creek Yards 5050 Pearl St Essential Services Goose Creek Government Facilities low - " mo- a-rT ' - I "i mt lit L - -fv , 'tS 4199 'M 510 s , -W, i r aoueulpio pasodOJd t suoilelnbaj jA-009 jol paau eql MiBlA9U . suolleln5ei UOIJenale I? ;gblaq ueemlaq sloiUu00 P!OA d sassouisnq Ilews pue sigoiduou of sloeduul aziwiul" • ~oeqpoaj pounoo Al!o sallllloeJ 6ul6po-1 - slepoleIN snopaezBH 1 , a - 'f• a 1 saoinaaS lelluass3 suoileln+do, j jsl:l-jV 6pE)pnloul s,ouM •~tf i C ~ OZ Aen ao liady . ilounoo Alin . C ~OZ gojen ao •qa=l . paeo8 6u'uueld . EwZ Uef • paeo8 AJOSInpd saoanosa~j aaleM . auil@wlmi lealluGlOd }uawleaa1 aaleM alseM L# u011elS GJIJ s sueld JuawaOeuevq AouaBjewa 1 •Z uoiIoaIoad pool] leinjonilS • :sjuawajinba~j posodoad Omi All feedback is welcome! criticize motivate help change modify incitate us convert update improve design move Additional Slides Relative Impact of Ordinance 500- and 100-yr % of Impacted Floodplain Properties otal # of Properties 5300 - of Facilities with New 40 0.6% Structural Protection of Facilities with Emergency 80 1.5% Management Plans Master Plans and Other Guidance City of Boulder, Colorado e Flood 6p/c Multi-Hazard Mitigation Plan Q _E City of Boulder- r: ;~'~t1 N x ~i\. AlftL s I'ts' MasteC P~ - ~ Recover" fit. yyyyf . y".._. _ r •.~il Pill 4' I3~- \ 1 a zG _ `trvloz'a unr 4 snvuco14 Sam. OPLL Pwlq Ar nnouS nl <,snsuasuoo pua /CsaanOJIUOO„ . saJOIJJV eJ9WCO AIiaa . sbuilaan aaaawwoo jo aagwego aappo8 . sbulIGGN aa11iu wOO f5uiuuald Aauabaaua~3 POOI . asnoH uadp . juawabebu3 oilgnd 6F g~J WATER RESOURCES ADVISORY BOARD INFORMATION PACKET MEMORANDUM To: Members of the Water Resources Advisory Board From: Jeff Arthur, Director of-Public Works for Utilities Bret Linenfelser, Water Quality and Environmental Services Coordinator Russ Sands, Water Conservation Program Manager Date: December 17, 2012 Subject: hif'Onnation Item - Water Conservation Program and Rebate Changes EXECUTIVE SUMMARY: The City of Boulder (city) Water Conservation Program (WCP) has issued and processed rebates for water efficiency upgrades for the last 16 years. The rebate portion of the WCP has aided city and WCP efforts to lower peak-day demand, delay capital improvement projects and reduce total water consumption at buildout. As many of these goals have been achieved, the WCP is realigning program efforts, including rebates, to better meet current city needs and directives. Staff analysis has concluded that traditional rebates and the use of a paper rebate form is more costly and less effective than methods which utilize partner programs and offer direct assistance. In 2013, WCP rebates will be replaced with more targeted residential and commercial efforts which decrease resource intensity but offer greater benefits to participating customers. BACKGROUND: In the face of high peak-day water demands, projection for increased water use and limited water production capabilities, the city's 1990 Treated Water Master Plan (TWMP) recommended water conservation as the most cost effective means of increasing system flexibility. A key TWMP recommendation was fulfilled in 1992 with the establishment of the city's WCP. The U.S. Energy Policy Act was also passed in 1992 requiring, among other things, that only 1.6 gallon per flush (gpf) or lower toilets could be sold. These requirements became effective in Colorado in 1994 and laid the groundwork for indoor water conservation rebate programs, including the city's WCP rebate program, which began in 1995. Master Planning and Drought Direct WCP Rebates The 2000 TWMP update included city water reduction goals and recommended issuing not only indoor, but specific outdoor water efficiency incentives. The TWMP recommendations and parallel WCP consumption reduction goals by customer type, came directly from the 2000 Water Conservation Futures Study (WCFS). The WCP rebate program was retooled to include the TWMP and WCFS recommendations, which have evolved over time. Some mainstay components like drip irrigation rebates are still rebated while less effective rebates such as the once popular buffalo grass rebate have been discontinued. Additional WCP funding also provided dollars for new outdoor water efficiency programs such as Garden-In-A-Box (GIAB) xeriscape plants and Slow-the-Flow (STF) irrigation water audits. Both of these programs are offered through the Center for ReSource Conservation (CRC) but are funded by the WCP. During the 2002-2003 drought water conservation messaging increased and the WCP played a key role in both responding to customer questions and helping reduce customer's water use. Rebates from the WCP saw an annual increase from 407 rebates in 2002 to 676 in 2003. 't'raditionally, 90 percent of rebates are split between toilets and clothes washing machines (washers). The majority of rebates (95 percent rebates; 87.5 percent of rebate dollars) have gone to residential customers, with a much smaller percent (5 percent of rebates; 12.5 percent of rebate dollars) going to commercial customers. The WCP budgets about $80,000 per year for rebates but may spend less in any given year (see Attachment A). The 2002 - 2003 drought and related WCP efforts had a significant impact on customers and the city. Customers made water related behavior changes and installed more water efficient devices, often with rebate assistance. The drought also spurred the city to begin work on a series of water efficiency-based changes from 2003-2009 including finalizing the Drought Plan, developing a five tier block rate structure, initiating water budgets and completing a Water Conservation Plan. The net result decreased water production demands from a pre-drought high in 2001 of 23,820 acre feet (AF) to an average of 18,737 A F from 2006 through 2011. The city's Water Utilities Master Plan (WUMP) was approved in 2011 and confirmed that many of the city's water conservation goals are being met. The WUMP also identified key WCP recommendations including support for: • Commercial, Industrial and Institutional (CII) Water Budgets Changes • Coordinating with the city's Local Environmental Action Division (LEAD) • Targeting customers with high water use • Reviewing and revamping the WCP rebate program Recent State, City and Local Rebate Findings Direct WCP Rebate Changes The following information highlights some of the key factors which influenced changes to the WCP rebate program stating in 2013. 201.0 • Colorado Water Conservation Board Statewide Water Supply Initiative: Efficient toilets and washers will be purchased regardless of rebates. • Denver Water Survey: 90 percent of customers will buy efficient washers without a rebate. 2 2011 • City of Aurora discontinues washer rebates. • New 0.8 gpf toilets enter the market creating new savings opportunities- • Castle Pines Metropolitan District study shows SMART Irrigation Controllers can increase water use and are not effective at reducing water use. • The city's WCP helps Local Environmental Action Division (LEAD) use water efficiency standards for city EnergySmart washer rebates. • The WCP directly rebates drip irrigation kits and timers through CRC instead of directly through the WCP rebate program and sales increased. 2012 • Dry and hot weather, increased irrigation use, and sprinkler system leaks highlight the need for the WCP to focus on outdoor irrigation efficiencies. • The city completes water meter upgrades and works with the WCP to roll-out meter leak detection letters. • The WCP hires AMEC to update the WCFS, which includes evaluating the rebate program. ANALYSIS: After taking into consideration the reduction in City of Boulder water use since 2002, recommendations from 2011 W UMP, and trends in the industry to not rebate certain items, staff are making significant changes to the rebate program for 2013. The traditional, resource intensive rebate program and rebate form will be replaced by a more targeted approach to residential and commercial customer assistance which will also result in reducing staff time and city resources. Residential Rebate Changes Given that 95 percent of rebates go to residential customers, the WCP is looking to increase rebate participation in other sectors. Similarly, with 90 percent of all rebates going to less effective indoor rebates, the WCP will shift its focus to outdoor water savings while still supporting improved indoor initiatives. Washer rebates will be discontinued given the low water savings potential. For toilet rebates, instead of discontinuing them completely, the WCP will offer a limited number of 0.8gpf toilets which will be given to customers free of charge if they get a low cost ($120) installation through CRC. If the customer prefers to use their own contractor the customer will cover the installation cost and a pay a smaller ($50) fee for CRC to confirm the installation of the new toilet and to recycle the old toilet. This ensures the new toilet is installed and the old toilet is recycled, neither of which is done under the existing rebate program. The WCP will also invest residential rebate program savings in additional outdoor water conservation program efforts. Outdoor water conservation programs will include free irrigation system repairs, upgrades to more efficient Matched Precipitation Rate (MPR) irrigation spray nozzles and installation of rain sensors for automated irrigation systems. These efforts will be completed by CRC with funding provided through the WCP. The CRC will also manage the 3 Water Conservation Fair in 2013 and, if needed, assist with a drought hotline, outreach and canvassing neighborhoods through a newly developed "Drought Buster" program. Attachment B provides a summary of residential WCP rebate changes for 2013. Commercial Rebate Changes Offering greater assistance to commercial water customers is key since only 5 percent of rebates have traditionally gone to commercial customers. Moreover, potential C11 water budget changes will require a greater level of assistance to complete indoor water audits. Water Conservation Program changes will divert rebate dollars to fund up to 45 water audits for commercial customers, targeting the highest water users. Audits will primarily be completed by Boulder County's Partners for a Clean Environment (PACE) program. Staff will work with PACE to identify possible rebate funding assistance for participating commercial customers. Commercial customers will be directed to contact the WCP through the website, but a larger number of rebate requests are expected to be generated after completing water audits. Since the focus of the C11 water budget study is on indoor water consumption, rebates are expected to focus on incentivizing indoor water efficiency upgrades. However, both indoor and outdoor rebates can be made available depending on audit recommendations and customer needs. Attachment C provides a summary of commercial WCP rebate changes for 2013. Cost Benefit of Water Conservation Program Rebate Changes By revamping WCP rebates, finding can be better allocated between residential and commercial customers and city resources can also be freed-up. Under the existing WCP rebate structure city staff spends around 624 hours processing rebates at a cost of approximately $17 per rebate (about $9,265 each year). The 2013 changes offer a cost effective way to provide a broader range of programs for both commercial and residential customers using the existing WCP budget. A list of benefits follows: • Frees-up staff time (about 1/3 FTE) to work on other projects. • Offers a greater range of WCP programs and customer benefits. • Provides a greater return on investment with regards to WCP cost and water savings. • Funds C1I indoor water audits without having to request additional funds. • Eliminates possible IRS fines from the city inadvertently allowing (by not keeping track of required federal W9 forms from the customer) rebates in excess of $599 annually. • Reduces paper waste associated with printing and processing rebates. Attachment D summarizes WCP rebate changes with budgeted costs from 2012 to 2013. Review of WCP Changes As part of the ongoing WCFS update initiated in 2012, the 2013 WCP rebate changes have been reviewed and are supported by the project consultant, AMEC. Attachment E provides a summary of supported rebate changes by AMEC. NEXT STEPS: Staff is currently working with CRC and Boulder County (PACE; EnergySmart) to finalize contracts for 2013. Water Conservation program website updates will be made by January 1, 4 2013. Residential rebate inquiries will be redirected to CRC while commercial customers will be directed to call WCP staff who will work with Boulder County to provide audits, advisors and rebates. ATTACHMENTS: Attachment A 2000-2012 Rebate Breakdown Attachment B - Current Rebates and Proposed Residential Changes Attachment C - Current Rebates and Proposed Commercial Changes Attachment D - Comparative Costs & Increased Program Efforts Attachment E - AMEC Memo ATTACHMENT A: Summary of Water Conservation Program Rebates 2000-20121 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 Rebate Type Cost Quantity Cost I Quantity Cost Quantity Cost Quantity Cost Quantity Residential Washer $34,200 342 $38,900 389 $29,625 390 $38,475 513 $30,000 400 Commercial Washer $0 0 $0 0 $0 0 $1,125 15 $450 9 Residential Toilet $0 0 $0 0 $0 0 $6,000 120 $5,500 110 Commercial Toilet $0 0 $0 0 $0 0 $0 0 $450 18 Irrigation & Landscape $2,505 15 $5,428 23 $5,295 17 $15,265 28 $7,300 72 TOTAL $36,705 357 $44,328 412 $34,924 407 $60,865 676 $43,700 609 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 Rebate Type Cost Quantity Cost I Quantity Cost Quantity Cost Quantity Cost Quantity Residential Washer $21,225 284 $22,625 302 $23,775 317 $31,050 414 $19,950 266 Commercial Washer $23,625 189 $9,600 18 $0 0 $750 3 1 $550 4 Residential Toilet $300 4 $1,650 21 $4,275 55 $12,700 141 $10,650 142 Commercial Toilet $0 0 $0 0 $738 7 $750 2 $900 8 Irrigation & Landscape $4,932 21 $8,039 54 $14,308 54 $12,259 82 $7,606 68 TOTAL $50,082 498 $41,914 395 $43,096 433 $57,509 642 $39,656 488 2010 2011 2012 (as of 11/4/12) Rebate Type Cost Quantity Cost Quantity Cost Quantity Residential Washer $26,775 354 $16,350 218 $3,508 149 Commercial Washer $375 3 $1,350 12 $0 0 Residential Toilet $16,555 308 $20,050 239 $11,683 131 Commercial Toilet $24,810 11 $7,525 I 19 $3,150 3 Irrigation & Landscape $11,484 117 $8,604 46 $1,2470 13 TOTAL $79,999 793 $53,879 534 $20,811 296 1 Due to data loss, staff cannot provide rebate data prior to 2000. ATTACHMENT B: 2013 Residential WCP Program & Rebate Changes 2013 Residential Rebate Changes Rebates Contact Description and Details for 2013 Smart Irrigation Control Clocks Rebates CITY No WCP rebate (see STF below) Drip Irrigation Rebates CITY No WCP rebate (see GIAB below) MPR Heads Rebates CITY No WCP rebate (see STF below) No WCP rebate; continue to support LEAD's EnergySmart Washers Rebates CITY Program (also see EnergySmart/WaterSmart below) Toilets Rebates CNo WCP rebate (see Free Toilet w/ Install below) 2013 Residential Program Changes Programs Contact Description and Details for 2013 Subsidized, Xeriscape gardens (20-40 plants) with plant layout Garden-in-a-Box (GIAB) CRC designed by a professional landscaper -NEW 2013 Plant pick-up date moved to May 18 when CRC will help manage the 2013 Water Conservation Fair Free Irrigation Audits with added savings and value including: Slow-the-Flow (STF) CRC -NEW 2013 Free Basic Irrigation Repairs (where applicable) Irrigation Audits NFW 2013 Free Upgrades to MPR Nozzles (where applicable) -NEW 2013 60 FREE Rain Sensors Installed Garden Essentials CRC Drip Kits, Drip Timers, Mulch & Compost; Same as 2012 The WCP has coordinated with LEAD, IT and Legal to combine NEW 2013 PROGRAM water data into LEAD's energy based Commercial Energy Rating Drought Busters CRC and Reporting Pilot. 100 free 0.8 gpf toilets w/ low cost ($120) install; toilet is NEW 2013 PROGRAM recycled; customer can opt to install themselves for a smaller Free Toilet w/ Install CRC inspection and recycling fee ($50) NEW 2013 PROGRAM[ Partner with the County Energy Smart program to develop EnergySmart/WaterSmart COUNTY WaterSmart advisors to focus on Multifamily Customers NEW 2013 PROGRAM Meter Leak Notification CITY City will mail customers letters if meter shows continuous use ATTACHMENT C: 2013 Commercial WCP Program & Rebate Changes 2013 Commercial Program Changes Programs Contact Description and Details for 2013 The WCP coordinated with LEAD, IT and Legal to add water data Coordination with LEAD CITY/COUNTY to LEAD's Commercial Energy Rating and Reporting Pilot. The WCP is contracting with the county's Partners for a Clean Environment (PACE) program to offer CII water audits in 2013. NEW 2013 PROGRAM Staff plans to fund up to 35 indoor audits based on the 30+ PACE Contracted Cil Audits COUNTY categories identified in benchmarking efforts. Some CII customers are unique and will require a more detailed NEW 2013 PROGRAM audit by a PE. Staff are considering contract up to 10 of these in PE Contract CIl Audits PE 2013. Staff will evaluate how to target outreach efforts at high-use NEW 2013 PROGRAM properties to assist with reducing water use. By restructuring Targeted the Rebate Program staff hopes to free-up additional dollars to Outreach/Rebates CITY/COUNTY assist with CII efficiency upgrades. NEW 2013 PROGRAM Meter Leak Notification CITY City will mail customers letters if meter shows continuous use 2013 Commercial Rebate Changes Current Rebates Contact Description and Details for 2013 SMART Irrigation Controller CITY/CRC Per Account Basis/ Direct Customer Contact/ Audit Driven Drip Irrigation CITY/CRC Per Account Basis/ Direct Customer Contact/ Audit Driven MPR Heads CITY/CRC Per Account Basis/ Direct Customer Contact/ Audit Driven Irrigation Audit CITY/CRC Per Account Basis/ Direct Customer Contact/ Audit Driven Washers CITY/COUNTY Per Account Basis/ Direct Customer Contact/ Audit Driven Toilet/Urinals CITY/COUNTY Per Account Basis/ Direct Customer Contact/ Audit Driven Other WC Related Rebates (Cooling Towers, etc.) CITY/COUNTY Per Account Basis/ Direct Customer Contact/ Audit Driven ATTACHMENT D: Comparative Budget, Rebates & Program Changes 2012 BUDGET 2013 BUDGET Garden-in-a-Box (GIAB) Garden-in-a-Box (GIAB) + NEW CRC/City Water Conservation Fair Slow-the-Flow (STF) Irrigation Audits + Slow-the-Flow (STF) Irrigation Audits + NEW FR1_E Irrigationn Repairs r. Pilot NFIVJ FREE iv`PR Nozzle Upgrad^s + NEW FREE Rain Sensors Instaiied Garden Essentials Garden Essentials Xeriscape Seminars Xeriscape Seminars + (1X) Seminar/ Water Tour Pilot F` _tiA) '013 PROGRAM Free i-oilet w/ Install TOTAL CRC PROGRAM COSTS $37,525 TOTAL RESIDENITIAL PROGRAM COSTS $62,220 N/A $0 { t".I-' PK C- ` A Drought Busters $10,000 N/A $0 TOTAL DROUGHT PROGRAM COSTS $10,000 N/A i`,J~,-VI iGl P?'OGkAVl PACE Contracted CII Audits $20,000 N/A JIFF 2013 PROGRAM. PE Contract CII Audits $10,000 N/A --0' PROGRAM EnergySmart/WaterSmart $10,000 Residential Rebates $70,000 N/A $0 Commercial Rebates $10,000 Additional Commercial Rebates $20,000 TOTAL REBATES $80,000 TOTAL COMMERCIAL REBATE & PROGRAM COSTS $60,000 TOTAL COST: 117,525 TOTAL COST: 132,220 amec ~ J MEMORANDUM To: Russ Sands City of Boulder From: Courtney Black and Lee Rozaklis AMEC Environment and Infrastructure Subject: Proposed Changes to the City of Boulder's Water Conservation Rebate Program Date: December 5, 2012 AMEC was contracted by the City of Boulder in September of 2012 to update the City's Water Conservation Futures Study. The original study was completed by AMEC (formerly Hydrosphere) in 1999. Since 1999, the City has made significant improvements to its Water Conservation Program, has generally achieved its water conservation goals as set forth in its Water Conservation Plan and as tested by two significant droughts (2002-2006 and 2012), and has experienced significant changes in water use patterns by its customers. Continued advances in water saving fixtures and appliances coupled with new demand management approaches point toward additional water savings while climate change science suggests that outdoor demands may increase. The City's water conservation efforts need to be updated to coincide with the available new technologies and knowledge within the conservation industry. The City's Rebate program was established in 1995 and currently consists of a toilet, washer, SMART Controller, MPR Spray heads and drip irrigation rebates. Many municipalities along the Front Range have adopted similar rebate programs. However, studies are suggesting that some of these rebates are not as effective from a cost/savings standpoint as originally assumed. As discussed in the City staff's memo for the WRAB December 17, 2012 meeting, toilet and washer rebates often simply accelerate indoor water savings which would occur naturally as these fixtures and appliances age. Money used for such rebates could be used for alternative conservation efforts that achieve a higher level of long-term water savings. Furthermore, from an outdoor water use perspective, studies are indicating that SMART controllers do not necessary reduce outdoor water use. In many cases, SMART controlled irrigation is set to match the turf's ET demands whereas previous irrigation methods provided lesser amounts of water. Municipalities are evaluating whether SMART controllers are a viable means to reduce outdoor irrigation and are considering alternative means. A study by NCWCD showed a wide range of deficit irrigation practiced on urban lawns, with ET demand supplied in only a small fraction of cases. We have reviewed the City staff's proposed changes to the Rebate Program. These include: ■ Use a portion of the $80,000 Rebate Program budget to target Single Family users. Efficiencies will be gained by partnering with CRC. CRC will take the administrative lead and will distribute rain sensors, discounted drip irrigation kits, timers and drip tubing, and provide free upgrades to STF irrigation audits, free irrigation repairs and 100 free 0.8 gpf toilets. ■ Use the remaining portion of the Rebate Program budget to focus on Multifamily and CII customers. This will include partnering with LEAD's Energy Smart and Smart Regs programs to identify and assist high water use multifamily properties on improving efficiencies and coordinating with LEAD and other partners on improving efficiencies and conducting audits in the CII sector. AMEC Environment and Infrastructure 1002 Walnut Street, Suite 200 Boulder, Colorado 80302 Tel: 303.443.7839 December 5, 2012 Page 2 AMEC supports these changes to the Rebate Program for the following reasons: The existing program primarily targets Single Family customers. The proposed changes include a broader range of the City's customers by diversifying funding and targeted efforts to multifamily and CII customers, which comprise the majority of the City's water use. ■ The proposed changes maximize benefits and reduce costs by coordinating efforts with other partners and programs such as CRC, Energy Smart, and SmartRegs. The changes incorporate the most up-to-date conservation practices by incorporating the more water efficient 0.8 gpf toilet and by eliminating the washer rebate and SMART controller which do not necessary result in long-term water savings. We recommend that City staff closely monitor these proposed changes as they are implemented in 2013. This would include tracking the benefits, challenges and lessons learned. These observations should be recorded and considered in future improvements to the program. AMEC will also thoroughly evaluate the program/rebate efforts and make final recommendations when the Water Conservation Futures Study update is completed in June 2013. Sincerely, Courtney Black, PE Lee Rozaklis AMEC Farth & Environmental