HomeMy WebLinkAboutAgenda - Natural Resources Committee - 12/04/2019
South Burlington Natural Resources Committee
575 Dorset Street South Burlington, VT 05403
(802) 846-4106
www.sburl.com
Natural Resources Committee Meeting
Wednesday December 4, 2019 at 6:00 PM
Medium Upstairs Conference Room
South Burlington Municipal Offices, 575 Dorset Street
AGENDA
1) Review of Emergency Evacuation Protocol (6:00 pm)
2) Additions, Deletions or Changes in order of Agenda Items (6:05 pm)
3) Comments from the Public not related to the Agenda (6:10 pm)
4) Adoption of Minutes (6:15 pm)
a) See Drafts of October 2 & October 30 Minutes
5) Presentation by UVM NR206 Class – Interpretive Signs at Wheeler Nature Park (6:20 pm)
6) Chair's Comments to NRC Members (6:30 pm)
a) Chair is Resigning as Chair of Committee
b) Discuss Process for Appointment of Chair & Vice-Chair
7) Review & Possible Action Related to DRB & LDR Work Group Report (6:50 pm)
a) Review Work Group Progress
b) Members Discussion – Tim Hess to present Proposal
c) Adopt Motions if Needed
8) SBLT Pennies for Preservation Proposal & Discussion by Duncan Murdoch (7:05 pm)
9) Discussion of NRC Priorities (7:15 pm)
a) Creation of Work Groups
b) NRC Efficiency
10) Members & Staff Reports (7:30 pm)
a. Chair
b. Staff Report
c. Other Committee & Members Comments
11) Review of Agenda Pending Items (7:40 pm)
12) Confirm Next Mtg Date is Wednesday 1/1/2020 (1st Wed.) (7:50 pm)
Note: The January Mtg is New Year's Day. Reschedule meeting to January 15, 2020, 6:00 PM. (3rd Wed.)
13) Adjourn (8:00 pm)
Natural Resources Committee
October 02,2019
Attending: Ashley Parker, David Crawford, Linda Chiasson, Duncan, Murdoch, Jean Chaulot, Ray Gonda,
Lisa Yankowski
Missing: Tim Hess, Alyson Chalnick & Laura Williams
!. Ashley reviewed emergency procedures.
2. Additions, deletions or changes to the agenda.
3. Comments from the public.
4. Minutes from September 04, 2019 meeting adopted.
5. Member comments on NRC status.
David wants committee members to feel good about meetings : that we feel we are productive,
listen to each other, fast, and treat each other respectfully. We have new committee members and
need to be cognizant that we are at different levels of experience within the committee. We are a work
in progress. We are passionate about our mission and want to help promote and preserve the natural
resources in the place we call home. There can be confusion and we get frustrated when we feel we
aren’t being effective. Our agendas need to be open and flowing. We need to keep educating ourselves
and our neighbors.
7. Discussion led to the work group and what we feel our “charge” is.
- We are working on a way to better get involved with potential developments at the very
beginning. Before the developers actually file plans with the Planning Dept. David wants to concentrate
on the tree canopy, land maintenance & wildlife habitat connectivity. He wonders if the mission for the
work group was clear. Jean feels we are working on the best way to get involved.
- We are to look at LDRs and how they correspond to what we would like to see and
make recommendations . Ashley is our city liaison
8. We are putting aside discussion of future development projects that have come to the Planning Dept.
-Ray made motion to develop a set of guidelines to evaluate applications for potential
developments. The work group will take the lead on this.
9. Ashley is required to update the CIP (Capital Improvement Program), for the Open Space Funds used
for work on Red Rocks, Wheeler & Underwood. She presented what work has been done and hopes to
get done over the next year. The City Council feels this comes under the auspices of the NRC.
- Linda moved to accept the current CIP, Ray 2nd. Passed unanimously.
10. We re visited interest expressed by Linda and Lisa regarding herbicide use . Does South Burlington
have a policy about using herbicides? We do want to pursue this topic and move forward. Ray has
expressed interest in being involved. Linda wants to work on this due the detrimental effects that can
result from use. Lisa has k knowledge in this area because of where she works.
- We need to talk to Craig Lambert about any city policy. Ashley will check with Holly Rees from
Rec & Park Dept.
11. Chair’s report- see report from David Crawford.
b) Interim Zoning (IZ),- From Duncan, they are getting closer. They have run 180 parcels
through their rating system. $0 Parcels have been found to be of high priority for conservation. The list
needs to be further evaluated and reorganized. When this task is competed there will comprehensive
information for each of the parcels.
THE NEXT MEETING IS 10/23 7-9pm.
c) Dog Park Committee- Linda reported the wetland has been delineated. An outside
consultant will need to be hired to develop the plans that will go to the DRB for approval.
d) The work group would like to meet with Marla. They will be meeting Sunday, 10/6 to work
on questions for her. Ashley is them liaison.
e)
f) Staff report- see report from Ashely. Champlain Valley Conservation Partnership will be
removing invasives at the Ewing parcel October 19, 9-11am.
12. Pending items: email them to David, Linda and Ashley. See the memo.
Ashley says the city cannot locate the original charge from the city for the NRC. We may want to have
our charged changed to reflect the activities we are currently working on. We could also try getting a
name change done as has been proposed.
13. Next meeting is November 6, 2019 at 6pm.
Linda motioned to adjourn, Lisa 2nd. Adjourned at 8:02pm.
NRC Special Meeting Minutes 10/30/19 6:30 pm
Attending: David Crawford, Lisa Yankowski (clerk), Ray Gonda, Tim Hess, Duncan Murdoch,
Jean Chaulot.
Missing: Linda Chiasson, Laura Williams & Ashley Parker
Public: Alyson Chalnick, from the Dorset Meadows Developer Group- Peter Kahn, Bryan
Currier, Brett Bartlett, Dean Bartlett
1) David reviewed emergency procedures.
2) Additions to the agenda.
a. Letter from Ray Gonda to Marla Keene regarding reasons to oppose the
proposed Dorset Meadows Development.
b. Statement from Dorset Meadows requesting Ray to step away from the
discussions tonight due to a conflict of interest. Allyson is attending as a private
citizen and not a member of the NRC committee.
c. Ray declined to recuse himself per discussion with city attorney Andrew Bolduc,
that there is no conflict of interest. Peter’s opposition is due to Ray’s adamantly
& publicly stating his opposition to the proposed Dorset Meadows development
and that he is now trying to use the committee to further bring forth these
feelings.
i. Ray’s rebuttal – “The comments were made when he was not a member
of the NRC but a private citizen with no financial investment in the
development- no conflict.”
ii. Lisa then asked if her statement in front of the city council after a
presentation by the Open Space Group was a conflict of interest. It is
not.
Tim wondered if it was a conflict for Ray to participate in the evening’s
discussions if he did not participate in any votes. David explain that Ray could
cause a mis-vote if we voted on his letter.
6:30 pm the committee decide to proceed with the meeting.
3) No public comments.
4) Chairs comments- David wanted to remind everyone that despite what we decide or
don’t decide to present to the DRB- we must remain respectful and recognize all points
and thoughts. He is also concerned that the newest member s of the committee may
not have been completely presented with the NRC’s prior information and requests
regarding the Dorset Meadows plans.
a. The Dorset Meadows Group gave us the presentation they had given the group
previously.
i. Ray asked us to refer to his letter to the DRB. (This is the letter he
composed and was to, possibly, be voted on tonight. There was a
moratorium in the city- land was being developed too fast without
enough thought as to the overall consequences. Decisions were being
done piecemeal- as a new project came to the city for approval. This is
why we now have Interim Zoning in place. The Dorset Meadows plans
were being considered before IZ started.) He explained why he feels
where the buildings will be not a good plan. One of the areas would
fragment space around the great swamp and affect the wildlife corridor.
ii. Tim asked if the plans had changed due to comments. David answered
that the NRC had made recommendations the DRB had not considered.
Lisa and Duncan had expressed concerns about a preserving connectivity,
a culvert and any guard rails that might impede wildlife movement. This
was considered. They still need to go before Act 250 on the state level.
b. Paul, (Dorset Meadows group) said they wanted to come tonight because they
were feeling there had been a change in the feelings coming from the NRC. They
wanted to present some of the history leading up to today.
i. Before 2006, the South East Quadrant (SEQ), was zoned as a single area.
2004 Arrowwood did a study of the natural resources in the SEQ. The
report led to zoning changes, took 50% of the area off from being
developed and instilled a 300ft buffer around the great swamp. TDRs
were created to protect the property owners in the SEQ.
c. DM presented their plans to the city who required certain changes. Staff, Public
Works, Rec Path, Storm Water …….. all had suggestions they would like to see,
including the NRC. The DRB had other changes and preliminary plat approval
was received. The developers have also met with the state, the Army Corp of
Engineers and had archeological studies done. The approval meets the
Comprehensive Plan goals.
d. DM wanted to convey that the area for development is only part of the whole
parcel that can be developed. A large part cannot be developed. They have
done everything and felt Ray’s letter follows too closely to the views of the group
suing to prevent the development. They feel they are being bullied by a group
who have their large homes and have stated they will keep filing suits because of
deep pockets. They also felt they were being ambushed by the NRC.
1. Allyson to offense at this comment and reiterated that she had
moved here from Maryland and bought a house that was already
built.
2. Ray asked how many people were on the NRC previously. We
believe 5 or 6. David, Lisa & Duncan were only the NRC originally.
David is concerned with how we handle the proposed letter to the DRB. The wording makes it
sound like the NRC is stating opposition to the development. How will the group be perceived
on future projects. We have a passion towards natural resources that needs to be preserved.
Ray disagrees with the “opposition against”.
We want to keep being able to provide feedback and suggestions to protect natural resources
on future projects. Duncan acknowledged that some of our suggestions did result in changes to
the DM plans.
Ray moved we vote on the letter as policy with amendments Duncan questioned the “no
amendments”. But Ray felt there were no needed changes.
Duncan motioned to continue the meeting to 8:15pm, Jean 2nd. 6 voted aye- approved.
Jean felt the letter’s first sentence was brutal and many changes had been made to the
approved plans and perhaps we needed to do more exploration. Tim asked if the city wants the
opinion or statements from any of the other committees. The letter is trying to set policy. Per
Ray- our Mission Statement is to sustain….. advise……… ADVISE is the keyword.
Note: most departments and committees don’t actually state approval of a project. They look
at a project, comment and make suggestions. The DRB is the final arbitrator. The developer
feels they will have final plat approval within 2 meetings with the DRB. Ray is afraid they will be
approved before the NRC can do any further exploration
DM still needs Act 250 approval and some of the NRC members wish to become involved in the
process. This would have to be allowed by the city. Jean motioned and volunteered to work
with the city at the Act 250 hearing so the NRC will have a voice. Lisa 2nd. 5- yeah Ray
abstained.
Discussion of the letter is being left. Ray would like the group at the DRB meeting 11/5. Tim
would like a document of what was done, results, discussions on this project- for our files. What
happened, what didn’t happen.
Lisa motioned to adjourn at 8:30pm, Tim 2nd. 5 ayes- Ray abstained.
Wheeler Nature Park Interpretive Signs
NR 206
Laura Pinover & Audrey Seery
Problem Definition
Wheeler Nature Park is in need of
educational interpretive signs for
people who make use of the trails
Building relationships with local nature,
especially in an urban setting, can help
foster environmental stewardship
Approaches to Change
The signs will be scattered throughout Wheeler
Nature Park depicting features such as
viewpoints, bird habitat, vernal pools, leashed
pets, and maple sugaring.
Photos of the specified areas to incorporate
into the design
GPS points for suggested locations
Educate the community about the nature park
to give a sense of pride
Pet Conduct
●Keep dogs on leashes
●Ensure quality habitat for wildlife,
free of chasing and barking
●Pick up after your pet
●Waste left behind ends up polluting
groundwater and surrounding
streams
Wetlands and Vernal Pools
●Ecological functions include: water
filtration, flood protection, and
groundwater recharge
●Potash Brook Watershed
●Vernal Pools in the spring
●Provide amphibian habitat
Invasive Species
●Weed Warrior Program
●Buckthorn, Honeysuckle, Phragmites,
Wild Parsnip, Japanese Barberry,
Common Reed, and Autumn Olive
●Compete with native species for
space and resources
Early Successional Shrubland Habitat
●Early stages from grassland to forest
●Golden Winged Warbler arrives in May
●Species in decline due to habitat loss
●Soils mostly clay (Vergennes clay and
Sovington silty clay)
●Eastern Red Cedar, American Elm, Silky
Dogwood, and Grey Stemmed
Dogwood
Maple Sugaring in
Wheeler Nature Park
●UVM class in the spring
●Integrates the surrounding
neighborhoods/communities
●Old homestead may have used the
forest for sugaring
Viewshed
●The Green Mountains can be seen
almost immediately
●Formed 350-450 million years ago
●Mount Mansfield, the tallest
mountain in Vermont, is present in
the view
●Stretches over 250 miles
Tradeoffs and Impacts Impact Assessment :
-Feedback from park users, and City of
South Burlington’s Recreation and
Parks Department through survey
Trade Offs:
-Losing the wild feel of Wheeler Nature
Park with signage
-Careful with language for pet behavior
sign
Resources for our
outcomes
Ashley Parker, Margaret Fowle, Walt
Poleman
Wheeler Park Management Plan
Our personal knowledge of ecosystems
Written communication skills
Hoping to let the community step in and
learn how valuable the area is, not just a
city managed park
Works Cited
Dorset Park Natural Area Natural Resource Inventory and Management Recommendations. (2009, August). South Burlington, VT: The
LAND Stewardship Program.
Hughes, M., & Morrison-Saunders, A. (2010). Impact of Trail-side Interpretive Signs on Visitor Knowledge. Journal of Ecotourism,
122-132.
Lowenstein, F. (1988, May). Woody vegetation assessment of the proposed Dorset Street Park, South Burlington, Vermont. Burlington,
VT.
South Burlington Natural Resources Committee. (2015, August) Wheeler Nature Park Management Plan. South Burlington, VT: City
of South Burlington.
Wheeler Nature Park. (n.d.). Retrieved September 20, 2019, from South Burlington Vermont website:
http://www.southburlingtonvt.gov/parks_and_facilities/natural_areas/wheeler_nature_park.php
Project Review Work Group (WG) for the Natural Resources Committee
Progress Report after Meeting with Marla Keene and Ashley Parker
1 PM on October 31, 2019 (City Hall)
Persons Attending: Marla Keene (Development Review Planner), Ashley Parker (City
Project Manager), Ray Gonda, Jean-Sebastian Chaulot, and Tim Hess (WG members)
• Members of the WG stated that their primary request for the meeting was to
analyze the current process for review of projects in South Burlington so as to
determine whether it was possible for the NRC to be involved more at an earlier
stage with ‘major’ and perhaps some ‘minor’ project review.
• Marla works with Dalila Hall (Zoning Administrator) to divide project applications
based on regulations and project impacts/sizes. Most fall into one of two
categories: 1) earth moving/new construction (requiring a permit process) or 2)
non- “earth moving” (requiring only an administrative permit – “yellow sign”).
Occasionally project applicants are required to provide additional information
before their applications are considered complete enough for Development Review
Board (DRB) initial review. The DRB is a seven-member volunteer board made up of
South Burlington citizens who are appointed by the City Council and is charged with
overseeing subdivision, site plan, conditional use, and all other Board review
applications. All meetings are open to the public and are typically held on the 1st
and 3rd Tuesday of the month at 7:00 pm in the City Hall Conference Room at 575
Dorset Street.
• The City receives an average of 5-6 applications every two weeks (less than 12 per
month) that require more than an administrative permit. Marla stated that they
recommend that completed project applications should be received in her office no
less than one month prior to their being heard by the DRB (on either the 1st or 3rd
Tuesday of the month as stated in the previous bullet).
• Marla’s post-meeting note through Ashley to the WG: “Primarily, Land
Development Regulation 14.03 lists what type of project is required and not required
to get site plan approval. Subdivisions that involve land development are subject to
site plan review. If for whatever reason a property is subdivided without any
development proposed, site plan review [and DRB action] wouldn’t be triggered.”
• Marla asked about what the NRC’s mission was regarding development reviews.
Ashley pointed out that though the current mission statement is active, the NRC’s
charge from City Council is not current. Thus, a new charge would need to be
reviewed and adopted by City Council for this purpose.
• That led WG members to ask Marla about a list of items that NRC would provide to
all developers in advance through Marla’s office (for example, preserve stands of
existing mature native-dominated forest blocks; use native pollinator shrubs/trees
in hedge or screens; preserve wildlife travel corridors (even over a corner of or
identify if on an adjacent property); minimize runoff to mitigate impacts of climate
warming). Marla was very receptive to this idea. {Editor’s Note: The items listed
should be specific enough to be easily understood, yet general enough to anticipate
further NRC review later.}
• Marla and Ashley recommended that the NRC (continue to) have a liaison attend
the initial/preliminary DRB public hearing for a new project and subsequent follow-
up (“continuing”) hearings. This would necessitate an NRC representative
(currently David only?) check the DRB agenda every other week to stay aware of
upcoming project hearings.
• The WG intends to continue developing Project Review recommendations for the
NRC, with a final product for consideration by the end of 2019.
South Burlington Land Trust Board Meeting Minutes
August 28, 2019
Northfield Savings Bank, Shelburne Road, South Burlington
Present: Sarah Dopp, Michael Mittag, Duncan Murdoch, Rosanne Greco, Karen Ryder, Janet
Bellavance, Allan Strong
The meeting was called to order at 4:35 pm.
Michael presented the membership and financial reports. There have been no substantial changes to
either. Sarah made a motion to approve the minutes. Allan seconded. The reports were unanimously
approved.
Sarah reported on an article in the Shelburne News regarding the 100 year old Maille farm in Shelburne.
Also, she received a note from Bill Gilbert regarding the poor conditions existing at the Overlook.
Michael will go to the Overlook and make notes regarding needed repairs. He will send his observations
to Justin Rabideau in Public Works.
Updates on the IZ Committees
Michael has sent the Natural Resources Committee notification that there is a discrepancy between the
state and city zoning. The state has Dorset Meadows classified as agricultural but there is no agricultural
activity including haying. The City has the land classified as residential.
Allan reported on the status of the work of the Open Space Committee. The identified parcels are now
ranked according to identified criteria. The Committee now needs to make decisions as to what attributes
deserve high ranking. The process for writing the report is also being discussed. An introduction to the
report will describe the process and input received from other IZ groups.
Michael reports that the TDR recommendations are near completion. He is making appointments with
developers and landowners (who own 10+acres) to discuss their views on the TDRs. Though he was not
able to attend last night’s Planning Commission meeting, he understands that the Commission is moving
toward extending the proposed Inclusionary Zoning Ordinance citywide (including the SEQ) in the future.
This idea was put forward by Affordable Housing Committee. Rosanne noted that this implementation of
this idea would be in conflict with the Comprehensive Plan. Rosanne is writing to the PC to point out this
conflict.
Janet confirmed that Green Up Day responsibilities between the City and SBLT have been spelled out and
are clear to both parties.
Pennies for Preservation (P4P)
Rosanne has spoken with Helen who reports that there will be no ballot in November. The next
opportunity for a vote will be at Town Meeting in March 2020. If P4P is to be on the ballot SBLT needs
to develop its game plan. The SBLT has been asked to give a presentation re: P4P at a joint City
Council/Planning Commission meeting. The suggestion is that Bill Keeton (UVM) and Jens Hilke,
Conservation Planning Biologist Community Wildlife Program VT Fish & Wildlife Department will each
give a brief presentation prior to an SBLT presentation.
The purpose of P4P is to enable the City to buy desirable land from property owners in order to conserve
it.
Rosanne determined that the ballot item will need to be submitted for warning on January 21, six weeks
before Town Meeting Day. Therefore, SBLT will need to have the wording completed and approved by
the City lawyer prior to that date.
Potential dates for presentation to the City Council/PC are 10/7, 10/21, 11/4, 11/18.
The following tasks were assigned and will be presented at an SBLT P4P special meeting on 9/20 and
10/1.
Rosanne: Communication and logistics for future City Council/PC meeting
Duncan: Potential organizations for funding
Allan: Costs for development vs. conservation
Janet: Dates for Jens and Bill Keeton to present to City Council
Karen: History of Open Space Fund
Given the special meeting(s) and Sarah’s absence, there will be no regular SBLT meeting on 9/30.
The next regular meeting of the SBLT will be on December 3, 2020 at the Northfield Savings Bank
on Shelburne Rd at 4:30.
Respectfully submitted,
Karen Ryder
Secretary
NRC Staff Update – 12/4/2019
- Regional Conservation:
• Municipal meetings took place on October 23rd and November 20th. The next meeting
will be January 22nd. We will not be meeting in December.
• A press release went out about the partnership.
• The community engagement event at the Ewing property on October 19th was
successful.
• The municipal partners are reviewing an online editable map that will help standardize
the language used to identify conservation parcels. This map will help the group identify
its priority projects and determine where conservation opportunities exist. We have a
deadline for edits of December 6th.
• A UVM NR206 group presented on their “Rent a Goat” project. It was very
informational, and will hopefully lead to the partnership engaging goats on a piece of
land in one of the partner municipalities.
• The partnership will be joining the RCP Network, which will be useful in providing the
group with tools to make the partnership more successful. They will also place our
region on their map of RCPs.
Open Space Fund Projects –
- Red Rocks Park:
• Stormwater analysis of the Red Rocks parcel has is nearly complete. This information
will help us prioritize trails and stormwater work for implementation.
• Just a reminder that if you have not completed the Red Rocks Management Survey,
please connect with me about acquiring one. I would like everyone’s input.
• I will be putting a report/summary together reflecting on the invasive plant removal
work done throughout the season. I will share that with the Committee when I receive
it.
- Wheeler Nature Park:
• Looking to receive trail assessment/report from Timber & Stone. Once that comes in, I
will be phasing out trail work to be done in the park.
• The City will be meeting with Audubon and Fish & Wildlife to discuss management
options and potential funding opportunities.
• The City will be coordinating additional Community Hikes next year with Audubon,
including some birding hikes at Wheeler and Underwood.
• I will be putting a report/summary together reflecting on the invasive plant removal
work done throughout the season. I will share that with the Committee when I receive
it.
• The UVM NR206 class working on the interpretive signage for the park will be
presenting their project tonight. They will be providing staff with proposed language for
5-6 interpretive signs that can be installed throughout the park. This will likely be done
next spring/early summer.
- Underwood Parcel:
• The City will be coordinating additional Community Hikes next year with Audubon,
including some birding hikes at Wheeler and Underwood.
• The City will be meeting with Audubon and Fish & Wildlife to discuss management
options and potential funding opportunities.
• Staff is working to select a design/engineer consultant to begin the design of Phase 1
park facilities, including the design of a shared use path, trail network, gravel parking
area, picnic area, and pump track. Staff is hoping to release this in the next month.
- Management Plan Task Force Update: I am hoping to schedule a meeting. I would like to
confirm that one of the following NRC members is still interested in being the NRC rep: Duncan
or Lisa. I will send out an invite shortly to try and get the first meeting on the calendar. Note –
Alyson was the member most interested in this, but is no longer on the Committee.
- Other:
• Herbicide Ordinance Info: At the request of Linda at the October meeting, I looked into
whether there was any existing work that had been done by the Committee when this
issue was last looked at. I checked with Holly Rees and Craig Lambert, and there is
nothing. Linda was going to connect with those involved with the lawntolake.org
website, but I’m not sure she was able to participate in the group’s most recent
conference call. If there is a Committee member interested in continuing this project, I
would be happy to connect them with the contacts Linda was working with.
• Open Space Project CIP: I presented this CIP draft to Council at the November 18th
meeting. Let me know if you have any questions about it.
South Burlington Natural Resources Committee
575 Dorset Street South
Burlington, VT 05403
(802) 846-4106
www.sburl.com
MTG TENTATIVE AGENDA ITEMS:
(NRC REG MTGS = First Wednesdays = (BEING SCHEDULED)
REMINDERS:
Send Email to Ashley & Chair if you cannot attend a scheduled mtg.
INFORMATION FOR NRC MEMBERS:
Future Mtgs are being Scheduled.
POSSIBLE ITEMS FOR NEXT MTG:
a) Items Deferred by Members from Nov. 4th Mtg.
b) Discuss Work Group Items = Members Set Priorities
c) Discussion of Other Possible NRC Priorities:
• Such as Habitat Connectivity & Protection of Open Space
• Tim Hess proposals
• Discussion of how to make NRC operation more efficient
REG. ITEMS: Members & Staff Reports
a. Report DRB Mtgs – Dave = In Chair’s Report?
b. Duncan on IZ Committee
c. Members Comments & Other Committees Reports?
d. Chair’s Written Report
e. Staff’s Written Report
ITEMS REQUESTED BY MEMBERS IN PAST:
a. Ray – Use of NRC Email List for “Personal General Interest Issues”
Vs. Items suggested for NRC Future Agendas
b. Duncan - Discussion of NRC Name & Duties Change
See Information Document = at 7/1/2019 Mtg = See Minutes
City Mgr Recommends we develop Revised Committee Charge.
c. Dave - Recommendation of Tree Replacement Fund be created.
POSSIBLE ITEMS FOR FUTURE MTG = UNSCHEDULED:
Discussion of NRC Ideas for IZ Special Committee to Consider
Discussion Item - Development Evaluation Document
Tree Canopy – Discussion of how to be more proactive
Scenic Views – Discussion of how to be more proactive
Other Items?
FUTURE ITEMS: = UNSCHEDULED LOW PRIORITY:
NRC PREVIOUSLY SHOWED INTEREST IN:
• Tree bathing event at Red Rocks that can be organized and registerable through the Rec Department.
• Bat house clinic for placement in City Center Park.
• Speaker Series in the Community: Importance of Rain Gardens, Rain Barrels, and At Home
Composting Law in effect 2020 (What to do?)