St. Vrain Watershed Master Plan Thursday, January 23 10:00 a.m. 12:15 p.m.

Transcription

1 St. Vrain Watershed Master Plan Thursday, January 23 10:00 a.m. 12:15 p.m. City Council Study Session Room City of Longmont Civic Center, 350 Kimbark Street, Longmont Minutes 1. Introductions a. Jeff Crane Crane Associates b. Reed Farr Facilitator for LSVRTF - Lyons c. Brad Schol City of Longmont d. Ken Huson City of Longmont e. Sean Cronin St. Vrain and Left Hand Water Conservancy District f. Matthew Best St. Vrain and Left Hand Water Conservancy District g. David Bell Boulder County Parks & Open Space h. Boyd Byelich - NRCS i. Jim Blankenship Town of Lyons j. Barb Brunk Local Landowner Representative (for Reggie Golden) k. Chris Sturm Colorado Water Conservation Board l. Diane Malone Boulder County m. Bridgette McCarthy Boulder County Parks & Open Space n. Ernst Strenge Boulder County Parks & Open Space o. Julie McKay Boulder County Transportation Why we re here? Julie: R2T focused on Longmont to Lyons; hosting meeting for larger watershed discussion discuss watershed level master plan for St. Vrain Creek; roles, local efforts, relationships, etc.; start with what s happening at the local level then discuss whether we want to go forward as a group with an RFP for master plan; then what s next steps to get funding o Chris: hoping to start contracting process soon release of RFP while doing contract; wants consensus to move forward with RFP 2. Overview of Local Planning Efforts: Descriptions of planning efforts taking place in different stream reaches along the St. Vrain Creek with additional group discussion interspersed under each a. Boulder County Comprehensive Creek Planning Initiative i. Julie: 3 tracks of planning initiative: first 2 = community engagement & local planning 1. Have been reaching out to residents tracking changes in creek alignments and other damage including debris 2. Now, looking to id what are high priority locations for spring mitigation 3. County to help facilitate mitigation efforts with landowners, NRCS, and others

2 4. Third track: watershed-level master planning (8 watersheds/sub-basins within the county); which county would lead vs. participate vs. partnership a. Little Thompson: has stream coalition b. Coal Creek / Rock Creek being led by UDFCD c. Left Hand: mainly within county jurisdiction d. St. Vrain: partnership of stakeholders 5. CWCB Grant: state willing to fund master plan; a. Chris: state has limited amount of money to make the master planning happen a finite amount waiting for requests to see what demand is need to consider other sources of funding for master plan b. Bridgette: $500,000 that county awarded is guaranteed c. David: what is expectation from other entities? Julie: in some situations county has direct land management (POS); county will facilitate RFP, contracting, and planning b. Boulder County R2Team (Lyons-Longmont) i. David: group started early on in flood process; saw challenges between Lyons and Longmont county owns 5 miles of river, Longmont infrastructure blown out, damage to local landowner, and ditch damages; how do we manage all of this conservation of river, hydrology, what each entity is doing along river including potential impacts to others, etc.; where do we get funding for planning this; emergency work needs to get done by April 1 currently implementing temporary berms and debris removal ii. Barb: been in crisis management mode and now want to look at long-term iii. Sean: reach has simple land ownership; county plans to put river back for infrastructure ditches, bridges, etc.; keeping process transparent; straw man envisioned a master plan with facilitator and community meetings once we found county applied for master planning grant it seemed that county could lead and R2T could be a reach within that planning effort how does reach plug into watershed wide planning iv. Julie: mitigation by April 1 everyone has been working in emergency mode; now want to look towards master plan 1. Will each entity act individually or collectively will R2T continue? don t want to lose knowledge and accomplishments of group 2. Potentially establish focus areas along creek and show how they fit in; add focus groups within RFP c. Town of Lyons St. Vrain River Task Force i. Reed: LSVRTF is a team of technical group set up by mayor; there is also a recovery working groups that FEMA is coordinating; trying to get grasp of next steps looking at putting together an RFP for Lyons that would then roll into St. Vrain watershed RFP would it be a separate RFP or combined with watershed RFP; currently working on debris removal and 5-year flood fixes FEMA will pay; LSVRTF is tracking what the working group is envisioning for section; South St. Vrain: from Lyons Quarry to town; North St. Vrain: from Apple Valley to town;

3 want to come up with approach that works with town; with 2 groups come up with some conceptual ideas that go to long-term repairs; ii. Jim: temporary protective measures based on 5-year runoff event; dredging, putting in channel blocks, temporary roads, etc.; currently waiting to find out long-term plans iii. Jeff: upstream concerns; assembled team of engineers for reconstruction of US 36 to Longmont Dam Road; working on stream rehabilitation in conjunction with road rehabilitation d. Longmont St. Vrain River Channelization Recovery i. Ken: pre-flood Left Hand Creek flood control project saved a lot of houses; St. Vrain through town got a lot of damage; Anderson Engineering had been working with city and brought back post-flood; potentially replacing bridge on Main St with CDOT; purchased trailer park as part of future flood control; within month will have final plan for creek within town; east of town jumped into gravel pits probably won t move back; west of town Lykins Gulch restoration helped bring water back to channel; doing temporary fixes west of town; breaches west of town flooding in Greens Subdivision; Longmont Dam Road / CR80 County Transportation just starting work at reservoir, city takes over; ii. Chris: state looking at opportunities at US 36/CR 80 to better handle floods and improve stream condition e. Other i. Chris: an intern is preparing average daily flows from April 1 to June 30 and for 2011 (an above average year); what type of deposition can bridges hold dredging may lead to additional costs and restoration if not done right; may want to wait to see what happens to channel after spring flows ii. Chris: CDOT hydrology is being developed for Highway 36 to Longmont and Highway 7; hydraulic model is already constructed which new numbers can be added to; all agencies will be able to tap into this model iii. Chris: CWCB is doing conceptual 100-year floodplain to give an approximation of 100-year floodplain iv. Chris: CWCB is willing to provide necessary information to all entities (e.g. hydrology, hydraulic models, etc.) Chris requested that everyone provide what they already have to effort, this will save money in master plan contract (e.g. Andersons model) v. Will calculate peak flows, low flows, etc. which will be useful for planning for habitat, recreation opportunities, ditches, communities, development, etc. vi. Boyd: NRCS working on small reaches of stream; Phase I exigent projects, Phase II all other damage; Chris: NRCS could help with implementation of master plan; Boyd: by end of next week, Phase II should be complete all assessments that they will do in county will be complete; Chris: don t want contractor to collect data that s already been collected 3. Discussion: What is the relationship between local planning efforts (above) and the proposed St. Vrain watershed master plan? Why develop one? a. Julie: any other ideas or issues that haven t already been discussed

4 b. Reed: putting together straw man for local planning conceptual ideas of what they re doing (fish passage, kayak park, etc.); Jeff: what would you like Lyons to complete to finalize RFP what does each group want to see in RFP; 4. St. Vrain Watershed Master Plan a. Agency roles i. Lead agency Boulder County is lead agency for master plan submit RFP, take bids, etc., but it is a collaborative approach; Chris: recommends calling St. Vrain Creek Coalition ii. Steering Committee: representatives of St. Vrain Creek Coalition; e.g. interview process, input, etc. iii. Participating agencies: Longmont, Lyons, St. Vrain and Left Hand Water Conservancy District iv. Funding partners: Boulder County and State (CWCB) initiate RFP and see what costs, then go back to partners as necessary; Chris: funding dollars for implementation will be more likely if multiple partners b. Timeline i. Chris: master plan process needs to be truncated firm needs to be able to move quickly on plan; need to set timeline; ii. Bridgette: RFP process likely to take 4-8 weeks from county; Jeff: 2 weeks for bids used Big Thompson as example (after submitting: 1 week to pre-bid, 1 week for bids); Chris: likes pre-bid meeting with reps from all agencies iii. Contract has to be awarded by county commissioners approx. 2 weeks from selection to contract iv. RFP Timeline: see below under Next Steps c. Letter of Support: Bridgette will take template she has and change for entire Coalition, then send out to group Lyons, Longmont, St Vrain and Left Hand Water Conservancy District; letter has no commitment of dollars only that each entity will participate in master planning d. Funding: in kind can be included; more partners is better; e. Watershed boundary St. Vrain Creek to confluence with Boulder Creek (St. Vrain State Park) i. Grant is for multiple drainages, but Boulder Creek, Coal Creek, and Rock Creek are being covered by UDFCD ii. County is starting with St. Vrain Creek, then Left Hand, then upper Boulder Creek basin (Four Mile Creek) iii. Separate contracts for each basin master plan group discussed whether to include Left Hand Creek with St. Vrain; Sean concerned that Left Hand is being forgotten; St. Vrain could be used as a model and then move quickly to Left Hand Creek; f. David: Need facilitator and communication piece to carry out master plan in RFP 5. Next Steps a. Next meeting February 5, 9-11:30 to conduct final review of draft RFP b. Send Grant Application to everyone c. RFP Timeline

5 Finalize Draft RFP Julie, Jeff Send Draft RFP to Coalition January Review Comments from team due by February 3 Final in-person review by group February 5 Issue RFP February 7 CWCB grant agreement finalized February 7 to 24 Pre-bid conference (Issue + 3 days) February 10 Proposals due (Issue + 9 days) February 17 Funding commitments finalized with partners After we ve received bids Evaluate & Score Proposals February 24 Recommend Contractor February 26 Select Contractor February 28 Contract Signed / Work Begins (1-2wks) March 15ish