Loading...
06.05.13 EAB Packet CITY OF BOULDER ENVIRONMENTAL ADVISORY BOARD MEETING AGENDA DATE: June 5, 2013 TIME: 6 p.m. PLACE: Municipal Building, 1777 Broadway, 1777 W. Conference Room 1.CALL TO ORDER 2.APPROVAL OF MINUTES May 8, 2013 A.The Environmental Advisory Board minutes are scheduled for approval. 3.PUBLIC PARTICIPATION 4.DISCUSSION ITEMS A.Market Innovation Program Design (Jamie Harkins) 5.PUBLIC HEARING ITEMS A.None 6.MATTERS FROM THE ENVIRONMENTAL ADVISORY BOARD, CITY MANAGER, AND CITY ATTORNEY A.2014-2019 Greenways CIP Packet 7.DEBRIEF MEETING/CALENDAR CHECK 8.ADJOURNMENT For more information call (303) 441-1880. Board packets are available after 4 p.m. Friday prior to the meeting, online at www.bouldercolorado.gov, at the Boulder Public Main Library’s Reference Desk, or at the Planning and Development Services Center, located at 1739 Broadway, third floor. June 5, 2013 EAB Packet Page 1 of 16 CITY OF BOULDER ENVIRONMENTAL ADVISORY BOARD MEETING GUIDELINES CALL TO ORDER The board must have a quorum (three members present) before the meeting can be called to order. AGENDA The board may rearrange the order of the agenda or delete items for good cause. The board may not add items requiring public notice. PUBLIC PARTICIPATION The public is welcome to address the board (three minutes* maximum per speaker) during the Public Participation portion of the meeting regarding any item not scheduled for a public hearing. The only items scheduled for a public hearing are those listed under the category PUBLIC HEARING ITEMS on the agenda. Any exhibits introduced into the record at this time must be provided in quantities of eight to the Board Secretary for distribution to the board and admission into the record. DISCUSSION AND STUDY SESSION ITEMS Discussion and study session items do not require motions of approval or recommendation. PUBLIC HEARING ITEMS A Public Hearing item requires a motion and a vote. The general format for hearing of an action item is as follows: 1. Presentations Staff presentation (15 minutes maximum*) Any exhibits introduced into the record at this time must be provided in quantities of eight to the Board Secretary for distribution to the board and admission into the record. Environmental Advisory Board questioning of staff for information only. 2. Public Hearing Each speaker will be allowed an oral presentation (three minutes maximum*). All speakers wishing to pool their time must be present, and time allotted will be determined by the Chair. Two minutes will be added to the pooled speaker for each such speaker’s allotted time up to a maximum of 10 minutes total. Time remaining is presented by a green blinking light that means one minute remains, a yellow light means 30 seconds remain, and a red light and beep means time has expired. Speakers should introduce themselves, giving name and address. If officially representing a group please state that for the record as well. Speakers are requested not to repeat items addressed by previous speakers other than to express points of agreement or disagreement. Refrain from reading long documents, and summarize comments wherever possible. Long documents may be submitted and will become a part of the official record. Any exhibits introduced into the record at the hearing must be provided in quantities of eight to the Board Secretary for distribution to the board and admission into the record. Interested persons can send a letter to the Community Planning and Sustainability staff at 1739 Broadway, Boulder, CO 80302, two weeks before the Environmental Advisory Board meeting, to be included in the board packet. Correspondence received after this time will be distributed at the board meeting. 3. Board Action Board motion. Motions may take any number of forms. Motions are generally used to approve (with or without conditions), deny, or continue agenda item to a later date (generally in order to obtain additional information). Board discussion. This is undertaken entirely by members of the board. Members of the public or city staff participate only if called upon by the Chair. Board action (the vote). An affirmative vote of at least three members of the board is required to pass a motion approving any action. MATTERS FROM THE ENVIRONMENTAL ADVISORYBOARD, CITY MANAGER, AND CITY ATTORNEY Any Environmental Advisory Board member, City Manager, or the City Attorney may introduce before the board matters which are not included in the formal agenda. ADJOURNMENT The board's goal is that regular meetings adjourn by 8 p.m. Agenda items will not be commenced after 8 p.m. except by majority vote of board members present. *The Chair may lengthen or shorten the time allotted as appropriate. If the allotted time is exceeded, the Chair may request that the speaker conclude his or her comments. June 5, 2013 EAB Packet Page 2 of 16 CITY OF BOULDER, COLORADO BOARDS AND COMMISSIONS MEETING SUMMARY NAME OF BOARD/COMMISSION: Environmental Advisory Board DATE OF MEETING: May 8, 2013 NAME/TELEPHONE OF PERSON PREPARING SUMMARY: Susan Meissner, 303-441-4464 NAMES OF MEMBERS, STAFF AND INVITED GUESTS PRESENT: Environmental Advisory Board Members Present: Chair: Vicky Mandell, Mara Abbott, Tim Hillman, Stephen Morgan and Larissa Read. Staff Members Present: Brett KenCairn, Elizabeth Vasatka, Juliet Bonnell, Susan Meissner 1. CALL TO ORDER V. Mandell The Environmental Advisory Board Chair declared a quorum and the meeting was called to order at 6:14 p.m. 2. APPROVAL OF MINUTES T. Hillman, M. Abbott On a motion by seconded by , the Environmental Advisory Board approved 5-0 the April 10, 2013 meeting minutes. 3. PUBLIC PARTICIPATION Kary Christ Janer, 130 E. Turner Ave, Berthoud, CO , spoke to the board about integrated energy approaches. 4. DISCUSSION ITEMS A.Update on Climate Protocol B. KenCairn presented to the board. He explained different protocol options and how they have been applied in other communities. After considerable review of available tools, the city selected the new ICLEI protocol, an international protocol with extensive use and support structure. SWCA will develop the emissions data management platform. T. Hillman thought the ICLEI protocol makes sense for a local government. He suggested holding off on taking a consumption inventory until the process has been better refined. L. Read explained that there were a lot of good reasons to use ICLEI and that it seemed like a well-considered decision. The protocol is comprehensive enough that other elements could be added at a later date. S. Morgan agreed that this seems to be a good and logical protocol. M. Abbott noted that an advantage of the ICLEI protocol was that it is widely used. There are many other municipalities with which Boulder can share and compare information. V. Mandell felt comfortable with this decision and thought it was a great use of CAP Tax funds. June 5, 2013 EAB Packet Page 3 of 16 B.Commercial Building Energy Rating and Reporting Pilot Report E. Vasatka updated the board on the benchmarking and disclosure Ordinance process, which is focused on energy rating and reporting. Staff is developing a phased approach including continued and enhanced voluntary programs, mandatory energy rating and reporting, and mandatory prescriptive measures and/or performance standards designed to get the most “bang for the buck”. Phase 1 included enhancements to the 10- For-Change program and Energy Smart, focusing on tenant, broker and building owner education and resources, such as green leases, in order to increase efficient energy usage and break down split incentives. Staff is working toward streamlining and packaging programs to be more user-friendly and efficient. Phase 2 is focused on benchmarking and reporting of energy use in Boulder’s commercial buildings. Energy Star Portfolio Manager is a standardized national tool which can be used to understand Boulder’s usage in a larger context. A pilot program was created to gather data, ensure its consistency and evaluate Boulder’s building stock through Portfolio Manager. McKinstry, Boulder’s energy efficiency consultant, provided analysis of existing private commercial building stock. Forty private sector buildings participated in the pilot: the majority were built between 1960 and 1990 2 with a median size of 15,000 ft. The Energy Use Intensity score rating goes from 1-100. Seventy five and above indicate that the building is a top performer in energy efficiency. The 19 buildings in the pilot that received a rating were rated as good performers, above 75. Staff will provide council with this information in the larger context of municipalization, integrated energy approaches, etc. M. Abbott clarified that the main goal of the pilot is to understand the return on investment in targeted areas and prioritize where resources should be focused to get the most “bang for the buck.” T. Hillman suggested that legislation to help move these initiatives forward could be helpful. He noted that benchmark data is important to demonstrate a need. E. Vasatka replied that attempts at state legislation have failed in the past and instead these issues have been moved forward through voluntary actions. V. Mandell was impressed with how much work has already been done and the data that has been collected on a voluntary, incentivized basis without regulation, but was concerned about striking a balance between taking action and waiting to see how this initiative fits in with municipalization. She wanted to ensure that stakeholders will be adequately notified of changes that will impact them. L. Read felt that the existing data was strong. She noted that the businesses that participated in the pilot could be good ambassadors for moving forward. She suggested breaking the data down further to better understand the nuances. S. Morgan noted that this information was great, but felt that it was painfully obvious that this was a political process. Some items will need to be regulated eventually because the political process won’t be enough to move it forward here. He emphasized Boulder’s interest in reducing emissions and being greener. He recommended having strong measurable goals. M. Abbott commended staff on building a solid foundation for this work. She recommended keeping advisors and assistance available to participants throughout this process. June 5, 2013 EAB Packet Page 4 of 16 5. PUBLIC HEARING ITEMS 6. MATTERS FROM THE ENVIRONMENTAL ADVISORY BOARD, CITY MANAGER, AND CITY ATTORNEY 7. DEBRIEF MEETING/CALENDAR CHECK 8. ADJOURNMENT Environmental Advisory Board adjourned at 8:11 p.m Approved: _________________________________________________________ Chair Date June 5, 2013 EAB Packet Page 5 of 16 MEMORANDUM To: Environmental Advisory Board From: Department of Community Planning and Sustainability David Driskell, Executive Director Susan Richstone, Deputy Director Jamie Harkins, Business Sustainability Specialist Brett KenCairn, Senior Environmental Planner Date: June 5, 2013 Subject: “Market Innovations” Open RFP Program Development EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The purpose of this agenda item is to collect input from the Environmental Advisory Board (EAB) on several key issues relating to the development of the “Market Innovations” Open RFP Program funded by the Climate Action Plan Tax. This new program was included in the recommended CAP Tax investment package in the fall of 2012 with the intent to solicit innovative solutions to reducing GHG emissions from the Boulder community. The 2013 allocation of approximately $285,000 will be awarded to submitted proposals that meet specific evaluation criteria and requirements that will be developed in coming months by staff and a proposed working group. The specific topics on which we are requesting EAB’s input include: 1.Scope of the program; 2.Funding strategy; 3.Engaging community/professional expertise; and 4.Role of the EAB, including possible designation of a representative to the working group. BACKGROUND One of the recommendations that came forward as part of the 2012 review of the city’s previous five years of CAP programs was the development of a Local Innovation or Open Request for Proposal (RFP) Program. This new program was subsequently included in the recommended CAP Tax investment package and is currently in the development phase. The general purpose of the program is to solicit innovative strategies to reduce GHG emissions from the Boulder community, in recognition that city CAP-funded programs need to be paired with private sector efforts to achieve our community goals. Specifically, the stated objective of the program was to foster innovation that leads to private sector adoption of GHG emission reductions. The mechanism currently being considered for implementing this objective is the establishment of a RFP process that invites innovative GHG reduction strategies from individuals, businesses or other organizations. The program is estimated to receive approximately 16% of the 2013 CAP Tax revenues, or $285,000—a minimum level identified by the CAP Tax consultant team in 2012 to promote meaningful market innovation. Staff has been referring to the program as “Market Innovations,” however a more specific name reflective of the program’s objectives is still under consideration. 1 June 5, 2013 EAB Packet Page 6 of 16 The program is supportive of the on-going Climate Commitment work which includes increasing the effectiveness of existing programs and piloting new innovation within the community. The program offers the flexibility needed to shift funding to better performing programs if selected proposals do not achieve a required level of effectiveness defined by staff and advisors. ANALYSIS As development of the program continues, several key issues have emerged that staff is requesting EAB’s input on. These issues include: program scope; funding strategy; strategy for engaging community/professional expertise in program design and delivery; and the role of EAB. Program Scope Staff discussions around the scope of the program (i.e. what types of initiatives should be solicited) have concentrated on two directions—one approach is to allow a broad scope of potential proposals including new techniques or technologies that maximize GHG reductions in either demand side management or development of renewable energy sources. The other approach is to focus the solicitation on areas with known needs for innovation, particularly market transformation around residential and commercial energy efficiency. In this context, market transformation related to energy efficiency refers to: efforts to alter market behavior by removing barriers and/or leveraging existing approaches and opportunities to further the private sector’s adoption and delivery of services related to energy efficiency in the residential or commercial/industrial sectors. Proposals focusing on this need for market transformation would include ways to improve or supplement existing CAP Tax funded efficiency programs or address marketplace barriers to achieve greater private sector adoption of energy efficiency practices and products. The program funding pool could be split between these two different directions, or could be completely focused on one or the other. Staff does recommend that submissions should be limited to energy related efforts in 2013, with the possibility of opening the program up to other areas, such as transportation, in future years once the process is established and refined. Funding Strategy Another important issue for the EAB to weigh in on is the funding strategy utilized to leverage market development. With the program’s original inception, a provision was discussed that proposals selected for funding must achieve or exceed the cost effectiveness of current CAP Tax funded programs— approximately $5 per ton of GHG reduction over a 10-year lifetime. While in theory this is a logical requirement it raises the question of what the most effective means is to foster new products and services. If the program focuses on technologies that are already proven to be cost effective, it begs the question of why the market has not already adopted these measures. If, instead, the focus of the program is on new technology/systems development, it is likely that these approaches have not yet achieved economies of scale that create competitive $/ton reduction levels. In these cases, the additional funding provided by this program could enable these new approaches to take the development steps necessary to improve their efficiency and thereby result in lower costs and more widespread market adoption. We are interested in getting feedback from the EAB about this choice of funding proven approaches versus “kick-starting” new opportunities. 2 June 5, 2013 EAB Packet Page 7 of 16 Engaging Community/Professional Expertise Staff proposes forming a working group of community members with a variety of energy industry experience to assist with program design and administration. This group will help address concerns raised by City Council over program oversight and proposal evaluation. It will be important to gather input from industry experts when designing the evaluation criteria and application requirements. In addition, it is possible that members of the working group will have the experience and connections to help grow the program in the future—one example of such experience is local clean tech venture funders. While considering the role of the City and of a working group, it is important to keep program oversight in mind. City Council has raised concerns about staff resources being taxed too heavily if selected proposals require active oversight and management. It is intended that the proposed working group will help avoid this issue by assisting staff with overall program supervision. In addition, the application requirements developed by staff and the working group will be designed in a way that clearly indicates the amount of staff oversight an initiative will require. Specific proposed tasks for the working group include: Phase 1 Finalize the objective and scope of the program based on EAB input Develop and finalize the evaluation criteria used to score applicants Develop application requirements/materials Develop oversight plan Assist with program launch Phase 2 Assist staff with evaluation of proposals and interviewing applicants Select winning proposals to be recommended to City Council Assist staff with on-going oversight Evaluate performance of selected proposals Refine program based on first year experience It could be possible for some members of the working group to contribute to Phase 1 and not Phase 2 should they decide to submit proposals to the program for consideration. Input from EAB will be used to refine the purpose and make-up of the group, and suggestions for preferred member experience or specific potential member names should be provided at this time. Role of EAB In addition to input provided on the topics presented in this memo, EAB’s role in the program development process and implementation should be considered. Staff recommends using the working group to develop detailed aspects of the program, such as evaluation criteria, and to select winning proposals. Once proposals are selected by the working group and staff, EAB will review the winning initiatives and make a recommendation to City Council for funding. It is also recommended that a representative from EAB be appointed to serve on the working group and report back to the board. 3 June 5, 2013 EAB Packet Page 8 of 16 NEXT STEPS The timeline for further program development, approval and launch is: 1.EAB input used to refine proposed program structure: June 2.Form working group and meet to define programmatic design details: July th 3.Return to EAB with a specific program proposal: Aug. 7 4.Information Packet to City Council containing program proposal: August nd 5.Program announcement and launch: Sept. 2 4 June 5, 2013 EAB Packet Page 9 of 16 C I T Y O F B O U L D E R INFORMATION ITEM FOR: ENVIRONMENTAL ADVISORY BOARD – June 5, 2013 PLANNING BOARD – June 6, 2013 TRANSPORTATION ADVISORY BOARD – June 10, 2013 OPEN SPACE BOARD OF TRUSTEES – May 8, 2013 WATER RESOURCES ADVISORY BOARD – May 20, 2013 PARKS AND RECREATION ADVISORY BOARD – May 20, 2013 GREENWAYS ADVISORY COMMITTEE AGENDA ITEM MEETING DATE:June 13, 2013 SUBJECT: 2014-2019 Greenways Capital Improvement Program REQUESTING DEPARTMENT: Anne Noble – Greenways Coordinator PURPOSE: The 2014-2019 Greenways Capital Improvement Program is being provided to board members as an information item. If you have any comments or concerns regarding the 2014-2019 Greenways Capital Improvement Program, please pass them along to your Greenways Advisory Committee representative. If you have questions on this material, please contact Annie Noble at 303-441-3242 or noblea@bouldercolorado.gov GREENWAYS ADVISORY COMMITTEEACTION REQUESTED: A recommendation from the Greenways Advisory Committee to the City’s Planning Board and City Council concerning the proposed Greenways Capital Improvement Program is requested. Attached is information concerning the proposed 2014-2019 Greenways Capital Improvement Program (CIP) for review and consideration. A recommendation by the Greenways Advisory Committee to the city’s Planning Board and Council will be requestedat the June 13, 2013 GAC meeting. Attachment A: Greenways 2014-2019 Capital Improvement Program Overview Attachment B: Greenways 2014-2019 Capital Improvement Program Summary Spreadsheet Attachment C: Greenways Program CIP Map 1 June 5, 2013 EAB Packet Page 10 of 16 Greenways 2014-2019 CIP Program Overview GREENWAYS 2014 - 2019 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS PROGRAM The city of Boulder Greenways System is comprised of a series of corridors along riparian areas including Boulder Creek and its 14 tributaries, which provide an opportunity to integrate multiple objectives, including habitat protection, water quality enhancement, storm drainage and floodplain management, alternative transportation routes for pedestrians and bicyclists, recreation and cultural resources. In order to maximize the overlap of objectives and to coordinate projects along the Greenways, identification of projects for the 2014-2019 Greenways Capital Improvement Programwas done as a team effort, combining input from Flood Utilities, Transportation, Parks and Recreation, Water Quality and Environmental Services, Planning and Open Space and Mountain Parks. The Greenways CIP follows an opportunistic approach, contributing funding toward projects that are being completed by other departments or private development in order to meet the various objectives of the Greenways Program. The Greenways CIP also looks to leverage funds with outside agencies in order to move projects forward that meet more than one objective of the Greenways Program, but may not be thehighest priority when evaluating any one particular objective.Projects included in the Greenways CIP are typically called out in the Greenways Master Plan and are projects that Greenways staff can take the lead in coordinating. Funding Overview The total 2014Greenways capital budget is $345,000, with $105,000 in the operating budget. Greenways projects are funded from the Transportation Fund, Stormwater and Flood Management Utility Fund, and the Lottery Fund. Annual funding distribution for the Greenways Capital Program for 2014is as follows: Transportation - $97,500 Flood Utility - $97,500 Lottery Fund - $150,000 Starting in 2015, the Lottery contribution is expected to be reduced to $125,441, based on Greenways receiving 15% of the city’s funding allocation, with a projection of total Lottery proceeds being $836,275. Accomplishments and Highlights During 2012, flood mitigation and path improvements were completed in conjunction with the Violet Crossing development, which was partially funded through the city’s CIP. A path connection was constructed along Fourmile Canyon Creek through the Elks Park. A flood mapping update for Boulder Creek was accepted by City Council in September, and is currently being reviewed by FEMA. Flood mapping updates are currently underway for Skunk Creek, Bluebell Creek, King’s Gulch, Upper Goose Creek, Twomile Creek and Boulder Slough. Once these mapping updates have been adopted, flood mitigation plans will be developed to evaluate feasible capital improvements for reducing the flood risk along these creeks and tributaries. 1 June 5, 2013 EAB Packet Page 11 of 16 Projects Completed in 2013 Wonderland Creek Diagonal to Winding Trail CEAP was completed in early 2013. Fourmile Canyon Creek Upland to Violet CEAP is anticipated to be completed by the end of 2013. Projects Expected for Completion in 2014 Goose Creek Restoration Project th Restoration improvements along Goose Creek between Foothills Highway and 55Street are expected to be completed in 2014. This project is primarily being funded througha Section 206 Restoration grant through the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers. The city’s 35% funding match is being met mostly through credits from city owned real estate. Projects Starting in 2014, but Not Completed th Wonderland Creek Foothills to 30 construction is anticipated to begin in 2014 th Wonderland Creek (28Street) Diagonal to Winding Trailconstruction is anticipated to begin in 2014 th Fourmile Canyon Creek at 19Street construction is anticipated to begin in 2014 All of these projects include flood mitigation, multi-use paths and bicycle and pedestrian underpasses. Highlights of 2014-2019 Projects The focus of the 2014-2019 Greenways CIP is on flood mitigation, bicycle and pedestrian multi-use paths and underpasses, and habitat and water quality improvements along the Fourmile and Wonderland Creek corridors. In addition to the projects along Fourmile Canyon Creek and Wonderland Creek, possible habitat restoration projects during the next few years include: Stream bank restoration along Boulder Creek at Eben Fine Park Confluence of Bear Creek and Boulder Creek at Foothills Community Hospital Dry Creek habitat improvements through Flatirons Golf Course th Goose Creek, railroad to 47Street tree plantings Fish Passage enhancement projects in association with Fishing is Fun grants South Boulder Creek minimum stream flow th Removal of Russian Olive trees east of 75Street along Boulder Creek The Urban Drainage and Flood Control District also completes maintenance projects along the major drainageways. In 2013 this includes the construction of a sediment trap along Fourmile Canyon Creek upstream of Broadway. Relationship to Guiding Principles and Master Plan and Prioritization Greenways projects address many of the CIP guiding principles. Greenways projects are identified in multiple master plans and meet the community sustainability goals. Most of the 2 June 5, 2013 EAB Packet Page 12 of 16 Greenways projects leverage outside or interdepartmental funding. Greenways habitat improvements seek to be sustainable and are intended to reduce the future maintenance required. The Greenways CIP has been developed within the context of and is consistent with the Boulder Valley Comprehensive Plan (BVCP), the Transportation Master Plan (TMP), the major drainageway plans, the Comprehensive Flood and Stormwater Master Planand the Greenways Master Plan.The Greenways Master Plan was updated in 2011to reflect improvements that had been completed,and adopted changes that have been made in other master plans, city policies and ordinances that affect the Greenways Program since the last Master Plan update in 2001. Information from other existing master plans for seven additional tributaries wasalso incorporated into the Greenways Master Plan update. Future opportunities will also be coordinated with the Open Space and Mountain Park’s Grassland Plan and Visitor Master Plan and Trail Study Area plans where appropriate. Transportation and flood utility projects were identified from the Transportation Master Plan, and the major drainageway plans, and intra-departmental meetings were held to determine project priorities and timing.Private development activities were also evaluated. Many of the Greenways projects shown in the CIP are being designed and constructed in coordination with major flood or transportation improvements. The Greenways funding associated with these projects focuses on habitat restoration, water quality improvements and trail connections. In addition to leveraging funding with the Transportation and Flood Utilities budgets, funding for Greenways projects is also available through the Urban Drainage and Flood Control District and Federal Transportation funds. New Projects The 2014-2019 CIP continues to focus on Fourmile Canyon and Wonderland Creeks. The Flood Utilityis currently updating the flood mapping for the following creeks and tributaries: Boulder Creek, Boulder Slough, Upper GooseCreek, TwomileCreek, SkunkCreek, BluebellCreek and King’s Gulch. Once the new mapping has been approved by FEMA, a flood mitigation analysis will be completed for each of these tributaries to determine if it is economically feasible to reduce the flood risk through construction of capital improvements. These studies, along with the Transportation Master Plan update will help inform future Greenways CIP projects. Operation and Maintenance Impacts $105,000is budgeted each year for Greenways operations and maintenance. $80,000 of the operating budget is dedicated to habitat maintenance. The Greenways habitat crew works closely with Parks and Open Space maintenance staff to provide on-going maintenance, as well as on collaborative projects as part of the operations budget. Major drainageway improvements are maintained by the flood maintenance staff and multi-use paths and underpasses are maintained by either Transportation or Parks maintenance, depending upon jurisdiction. Deferred Projects, Changes and Unfunded Needs Since the Greenways Program is opportunistic, taking advantage of projects that are funded through other departments, there are no unfunded needs. th The Wonderland Creek from Foothills to 30Street was granted Federal Transportation 3 June 5, 2013 EAB Packet Page 13 of 16 Improvement Program (TIP) funds in the amount of $2 million (2012-2014). Additional TIP th funding was granted for the Wonderland Creek at 28 Street project in the amount of $900,000 (2013-2014). Emerging Needs None BOARD ACTION The Greenways Advisory Committeewill reviewthe Greenways CIP on June 13, 2013 and will be asked to make a recommendation for approval to the Planning Board and City Council. 4 June 5, 2013 EAB Packet Page 14 of 16 5 4 Fourmile Creek Wonderland Creek 3 Linden Av Elmers 2 Goose 1 Boulder Creek Bear Creek Baseline Rd 2014 - 2019 / Projects 1 Goose Creek Restoration Greenways Program CIP 2 Wonderland Foothills to the Diagonal 3 Wonderland 28th Street 4 Fourmile - 19th to 22nd 5 Fourmile - Upland to Violet June 5, 2013 EAB Packet Page 16 of 16