Loading...
6 - Recommendation on the Goose Creek/Foothills Pkwy Underpass Community Environmental Assessment Process (CEAP) CITY OF BOULDER TRANSPORTATION ADVISORY BOARD AGENDA ITEM MEETING DATE: March 11, 2002 SUBJECT: Public Hearing and Consideration of a Recommendation to City Council on the Goose Creek Underpass at Foothills Parkway Community Environmental Assessment Process (CEAP) TO: TAB Members FROM: Public Works Department Tracy Winfree, Assistant Dir. Of Public Works for Transportation Stephany Westhusin, Transportation Projects Coordinator Debbie Ritter, Project Manager Noreen Walsh, Transportation Planner BOARD ACTION REQUESTED: Consideration of a recommendation to City Council. FISCAL IMPACT: This $1.4 million project is funded with federal and local sources. PURPOSE: This item provides the Transportation Advisory Board (TAB) with the Community and Environmental Assessment Process (CEAP) document for the proposed Goose Creek Underpass at Foothills Parkway project. The CEAP document (Appendix A) includes information on the project purpose and proposed improvements, preliminary plans, and the CEAP checklist. Appendix B includes the comments received through the Development Review Committee (DRC) process and the staff responses to those comments. BACKGROUND: The Goose Creek Bicycle/Pedestrian Underpass at Foothills Parkway project has been identified in both the City of Boulder Transportation Master Plan (TMP) and the Greenways Master Plan. The purpose of the project is to provide a grade-separated crossing of Foothills Parkway along the Goose Creek Greenway. Currently, the connection between the two portions of the Goose Creek Greenway path is separated by Foothills Parkway, forcing the use of alternative routes. The proposed project will improve safety by providing a grade-separated crossing of Foothills Parkway and will complete a missing link in the Goose Creek Greenway trail and the city of Boulder bicycle/pedestrian path system. AGENDA ITEM # Page 1 PROPOSED IMPROVEMENTS AND IMPACTS The project includes the following improvements: • Construction of a 14-foot wide by 7.5-foot high concrete box multi-use path underpass under Foothills Parkway, on the north side of the existing Goose Creek box culverts; • Construction of a 10-foot wide concrete multi-use path along the north side of the creek on the west side of the underpass to connect the underpass with the existing trail; • Construction of a 10-foot wide concrete multi-use path on the east side to connect the underpass to the existing Foothills Parkway trail and the newly constructed Goose Creek Trail on the south side of Goose Creek; • Extension of the irrigation ditch flume that runs parallel to Foothills Parkway on the west side, approximately 25 feet over the proposed underpass, and reroute an existing 42-inch storm sewer to discharge into Goose Creek downstream of the existing box culverts; and, • Site landscaping, in accordance with the Wetlands Revegetation Rules, and removal of non- native plant species. The project will be designed in a way that will not create any negative impact to the floodplain of Goose Creek. The project will improve the quality of the riparian habitat by removing non-native vegetation from the project area and replacing it with native species. The proposed project will not impact any regulatory wetlands. The project will not increase discharges to storm or sanitary sewer systems. PROTECT SCHEDULE: Construction is expected to begin in the late summer/early fall 2002. The construction timing will need to be coordinated with the ditch company that is perpendicular to the proposed underpass. During construction, there will be a shift in the Foothills Parkway roadway alignment during each phase of construction, but it will not be necessary to reduce the number of travel lanes. Construction is anticipated to take approximately seven months, concluding in early 2003. CEAP REVIEW PROCESS The CEAP document was submitted on Feb. 4, 2002, and was reviewed by other city departments through the DRC review process. See Appendix B to view the DRC comments and the Transportation staff responses to the comments. The project CEAP was submitted Feb. 5 to the Greenways Advisory Committee (GAC) for its feedback. The GAC did not submit any written feedback regarding the Goose Creek Underpass at Foothills Parkway CEAP. PUBLIC COMMENT AND PROCESS The Goose Creek Underpass at Foothills Parkway project was identified in the city of Boulder's Transportation Master Plan (TMP) and Greenways Master Plan. There has been public comment on the TMP, the Greenways Masterplan, and the City of Boulder Transportation Capital Improvements Program. At the March 11, 2002 TAB meeting, the board will hold a public hearing on the project CEAP prior to making its recommendation to the City Council. AGENDA ITEM 4 Page 2 BOARD ACTION REQUESTED Staff requests board review and recommendation to City Council on the Goose Creek Underpass at Foothills Parkway CEAP. If there are further questions or comments on this item, please contact Debbie Ritter at ext. 3253 or Noreen Walsh at ext. 4301. ATTACHMENTS: Appendix A - Goose Creek Underpass at Foothills Parkway CEAP Appendix B - DRC Comments and Staff Responses to DRC Comments AGENDA ITEM I Paee 3 APPENDIX A Goose Creek Underpass at Foothills Parkway CEAP AGENDA [TEM # Page 4 CITY OF BOULDER COMMUNITY AND ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT PROCESS Goose Creek Bicycle/Pedestrian Underpass At Foothills Parkway February 2002 1. Description and location of the project: The Goose Creek Bicycle/Pedestrian Underpass at Foothills Parkway project involves construction of a multi-use path and pedestrian underpass at Foothills Parkway. The proposed project is located along Goose Creek, crossing Foothills Parkway between Pearl Street and Valmont Road. See vicinity map (Appendix A) for project location. 2. Background, purpose and need for the project: The proposed project has been identified in both the City of Boulder Transportation Master Plan (TMP) and the Greenways Master Plan. The purpose of the project is to provide a grade- separated crossing of Foothills Parkway along the Goose Creek Greenway. Currently, access between the two portions of the Goose Creek Greenway path is divided by Foothills Parkway, forcing the use of alternative routes. The proposed underpass project will provide an important off-street trail connection between the west and east segments of the Goose Creek path. In addition, the proposed improvement will support those alternative mode users traveling between their residences, employment sites, personal appointments and recreation activities. Foothills Parkway is a Major Regional roadway with a Regional Bicycle Corridor facility running parallel to it. The proposed underpass will link to this Regional Bicycle Corridor facility as well as complete a missing link in the Goose Creek Greenway path. The Goose Creek path links to the Boulder Creek Path, the Foothills Parkway path, the newly constructed Valmont City Park, the Valmont/Pearl employment centers, and numerous on-street bicycle and walking facilities. 3. Description of project alternatives and summary of major issues: The following two major project alternatives were considered for action: a. No Action. This alternative was rejected due to the identified need to complete the trail connection and provide a safer crossing at Foothills Parkway. b. Follow Current Stream/Culvert Alignment. The most direct way to connect the Preferred existing trails. Alternative 1 Assuming the underpass and trail will follow along the stream and existing box culverts, the following alternatives were considered at the project scale. 1. Modification of the existing box culverts to serve as a bicycle/pedestrian underpass. This alternative would involve lowering the bottom of the two southerly cells to provide adequate headroom and the construction of flood/retaining walls. This alternative would allow the modified box to be utilized as a trail underpass during normal to moderate flood flows, then be utilized as a storm water conduit for high flows. This alternative would minimize disruption to Foothills Parkway during construction, as well as minimize conflicts with the numerous utility lines (storm sewer, sanitary sewer, irrigation ditch and irrigation flume). This alternative was rejected for several reasons. First, the safety concerns during moderate to high creek flood flows was deemed unacceptable. Second, the connecting trail and retaining walls upstream of the box would need to be constructed directly through the identified wetland area. Finally, the cost of modifying the existing structure was considered to be too high, as well as the unpredictability of modifying the existing box culvert. 2. Construct a new underpass north of the existing box culverts. This alternative would involve the construction of a new 14' by 7.5' box culvert under Foothills Parkway with serpentine trails constructed to connect the underpass to the existing trail system on both ends. In order to make the necessary trail connections for this alternative, numerous 90-degree curves would be required creating an unsafe trail alignment. This alternative could be economically constructed with few utility conflicts. This alternative was rejected because the connecting trails were considered less safe due to excessively curvilinear alignment combined with steep grades. In addition, the alignment required most travelers to venture out of their way. 3. Construct a new underpass adjacent to the existing box culverts on the north. This alternative involves the construction of 14' by 7.5' box culvert under Foothills Parkway, a trail Preferred Aftemanve connection on the west, parallel to the creek, to the existing trail and a straight connection on the east to a tee intersection near the frontage road with the trail constructed north and south to meet existing trails. This alternative includes the reconstruction and extension of the existing 42" storm sewer to cross Foothills Parkway and the frontage road and discharge into Goose Creek approximately 300 feet downstream of box culverts. (The storm sewer currently discharges into Goose Creek on the upstream end of the box culverts). The storm sewer extension is required because its current alignment conflicts with the proposed underpass and to allow the underpass to drain. In addition, this alternative will require extending the irrigation ditch flume that runs parallel to Foothills Pkwy on the west side approximately twenty-five feet over the proposed underpass. This is the preferred alternative. Although this alternative requires numerous peripheral construction activities (storm sewer and flume extension), it provides the safest and most direct route with the least amount of disturbance to the adjacent wetlands and creek. The underpass will only be effected by a 2 significant flood event. The west trail connection alignment will have minimal impact on the existing wetlands and floodplain. The east trail connection provides a direct connection to the trail along Foothills Parkway and the newly constructed trail on the south side of Goose Creek. 4. Preferred project alternative: The preferred project alternative is to: construct a 14 foot wide by 7.5 foot high concrete box multi-use path underpass under Foothills Parkway, on the north side of the existing Goose Creek box culverts; construct a 10-ft wide concrete multi-use path along the north side of the creek on the west side of the underpass to connect the underpass with the existing trail; construct a 10-ft wide concrete multi-use path on the east side to connect the underpass to the existing Foothills Parkway trail and the newly constructed Goose Creek Trail on the south side of Goose Creek; extend the irrigation ditch flume which runs parallel to Foothills Parkway on the west side approximately 25 feet over the proposed underpass and reroute an existing 42" storm sewer to discharge into Goose Creek downstream of the existing box culverts. 5. Public input to date: There has been public comment on the TMP, the Greenways Masterplan, and the City of Boulder Transportation Capital Improvements Program. 6. Staff project manager: The Transportation Engineering Project Manager for this project is Debbie Ritter. 7. Other consultants or relevant contacts: Consultants on this project include: Stuart L. Williams, Inc. - project management, civil engineering, hydraulic engineering MB Consultants - structural engineering, traffic engineering Ground Engineering - geotechnical engineering Love & Associates - hydraulic and flood engineering Professional Wetland Consultants - Wetland consulting Goals Assessment: 1. Using the BVCP, describe the primary city goals that the project will help to achieve: General 3 Community Design - SEE BELOW Facilities and Services Environment - SEE BELOW Economy Transportation - SEE BELOW Housing Social Concerns and Human Services The BVCP supports improved design of the Boulder Valley region through such features as appropriate connections of the trail system. The Goose Creek Underpass project will complete a missing link connection in the Goose Creek Greenway trail. The B VCP recognizes that the environment is a critical asset to be preserved and supports policies, programs and projects that ensure a sustainable environment. During the planning and design of the Goose Creek Underpass at Foothills Parkway, staff carefully assessed the effects on the adjacent creek, wetlands area and floodplain. The project alternative chosen is the least impactful on these features. The project includes environmental enhancements for habitat and water quality. The completion of this underpass and crossing of Foothills Parkway will promote the use of alternative transportation modes which will go towards supporting air quality improvement goals. The BVCP supports the establishment and operation of an all-mode transportation system. The city is committed to improving all travel modes and offering a number of travel options. The Goose Creek Underpass project helps to provide a continuous off-street facility for bicycle and pedestrian travel. 2. What are the trade-offs in terms of city policies and goals? This project is helping to promote the Community Design, Environmental and Transportation policies and goals without any major trade-offs to other city policies and goals. 3. Is this project referenced in a master plan? If so, what is the context in terms of goals, objectives, larger system plans, etc.? If not, why not? This project has been identified in the Greenways Master Plan and the TMP. It supports the TMP Bicycle Master Plan goals of a continuous bicycle system with access to major destination areas and provides safe and convenient travel. 4. How will the project exceed city, state, or federal standards and regulations? By obtaining the City of Boulder Wetland and Floodplain permits, this project will exceed the 4 federal standards and regulations for wetlands and floodplain. Impact Assessment 1. Using the attached checklist, identify the potential impacts of the proposed project or (if applicable) the project alternatives: 5 Community and Environmental Assessment Process Checklist E Project Title: Goose Creek Bicycle/Pedestrian Underpass at Foothills Parkway m m w w a A. Natural Areas 1. Disturbance to species, communities, habitat, ecosystems? X B. Riparian Areas/Floodplains _ 1. Encroachment upon the 100-year, conveyance or high hazard flood zones? X 2. Disturbance to or fragmentation of a riparian corridor? X 0- F, qW Mg fs C. Wetlands 1. Disturbance to or loss of a wetland on site? X D. Geology and Soils i.a. Impacts to unique geologic or physical features? O b. Geologic development constraints? 6- c. Substantial changes in topography? O E. Water Quality 1. Impacts to groundwater or stormwater quality? O 2. Discharges to the stormwater or sanitary sewer system? X 3. Potential impacts to streams, ditches, or other water bodies? X 4. Groundwater contamination on site? O F. Air Quality 1. Impacts to air quality? X s y 90M mr G. Resource Conservation 1. Changes in water use? Q 2. Increases in energy use? Q 3. Generation of excess waste? Q U~i KM H. Cultural/Historic Resources _ 1.a. Impacts to a prehistoric or archaeological site? O b. Impacts to a building or structure over fifty years of age? O c. Impacts to a historic feature of the site? O d. Impacts to significant agricultural land? U O dtv 1. Visual Quality 1.a. Effects on scenic vistas or public views? no X = Applicable Page 1 0 = Not Applicable s Community and Environmental Assessment Process Checklist b. Effects on the aesthetics of a site open to public view? O c. Effects on views to unique geologic or physical features? O kgg uF _ 1WINNER, ~..a'•k~ J. Safety 1. Health hazards, odors, or radon? O 2. Site hazards? O MR. `aai2`K. Physiological Well-being 1. Exposure to excessive noise? X 2._E_xcessive light or glare? O 3. Increase in vibrations? O fix. v'. ,°`.btiie Txi r~v^~t'~~.„-€' L. Services 1. Additional need for: a. health care/social services? O b. sanitary sewer services? O c. police services? O d. fire protection? O e. recreation or parks facilities? O f. libraries? O g. transportation improvements/traffic mitigation? O h. parking? O i. affordable housing? 0- -1. open space/urban open land? O _k. power or energy use? O 1. telecommunications? O Eau M. Special Populations 1. Effects on: a. persons with disabilities? X b. senior population? Q c. children? Q d. restricted income persons? Q X = Applicable Page 2 0 = Not Applicable COMMUNITY AND ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT PROCESS - CHECKLIST Goose Creek Trail Underpass at Foothills Parkway Note: The following questions are a supplement to the CEAP checklist. Only those questions indicated on the checklist are answered in full. A. Natural Areas 1. Describe the potential for disturbance to or loss of significant: species, plant communities, wildlife habitats, or ecosystems via any of the activities listed below. (Significant species include any species listed or proposed to be listed as rare, threatened or endangered on federal, state, county lists.) - SEE BELOW a. construction activities b. vegetation removal C. human or domestic animal encroachment d. chemical pollutants (including fertilizers, pesticides, herbicides) e. behavioral displacement of wildlife species (due to noise from use activities) f. introduction of non-native plant species in the site landscaping g. hydrologic alteration (groundwater, surface runoff) h. increased sedimentation in any body of water If potential impacts have been identified, please provide the following: • A description of how the proposed project would avoid, minimize, or mitigate identified impacts. - SEE BELOW • A habitat assessment of the site, including: 1. a list of plant and animal species and plant communities of special concern found on the site; 2. a wildlife habitat evaluation of the Site. - SEE BELOW • Maps of the site showing the location of any Boulder Valley Natural Ecosystem, Boulder County Environmental Conservation Area, or critical wildlife habitat. - NOT APPLICABLE a. The project involves construction activities in and around the Goose Creek stream channel. The construction crew will use Best Management Practices as described in the Wetlands Mitigation Guidelines, however some impacts to vegetation and stream morphology will be unavoidable. The project includes environmental enhancements for habitat and water quality that exceed the requirements for compensatory mitigation. 6 b. The vegetation to be removed will be primarily non-natives, and areas with good vegetative structure will be avoided to the extent possible. The overall quality of the wildlife habitat will be improved as part of the project. Site landscaping will be in accordance with the Revegetation Rules, and will improve the native vegetation and structure. Non-native plant species will be removed as part of the project. c. Because the project area is already highly urbanized, it is not expected that disturbance from humans and domestic animals will impact the wildlife that currently inhabit the area. d. Chemical pollutants will not be part of the project. Maintenance of the vegetation after project completion will be performed by selective mechanical removal of noxious weed species, with limited use of herbicides. If herbicides are selected for control, only chemicals certified for use near streams will be used. e. Although construction activities may limit the use of the area by even tolerant species during the work activities, they are expected to return after project completion. It is likely that the resident fauna include tolerant urban generalists which are not sensitive to noise or other human disturbances that may be associated with trail use. The environmental enhancements associated with the project are not likely to draw more ecologically important or sensitive wildlife species to the area due to the surrounding urban uses. f. Only native vegetation will be used in site landscaping, in accordance with the Revegetation Rules. g. Hydrologic alteration will not be part of the project, since the capacity of the stream channel and box culvert structures to convey flood waters will not be affected by the proposed project, h. Sedimentation will not be increased. Water quality enhancements such as buffer strips and improvements in vegetative bank stability will reduce sedimentation to the stream. B. Riparian areas/floodplains 1. Describe the extent to which the project will encroach upon the 100-year, conveyance or high hazard flood zones. - SEE BELOW 2. Describe the extent to which the project will encroach upon, disturb, or fragment a riparian corridor. - SFE BELOW If potential impacts have been identified, please provide the following: • A description of how the proposed project would avoid, minimize, or mitigate identified impacts. - SEE BELOW • A map showing the location of any streams, ditches and other water bodies on or near the project site. - SEE ATTACHED 7 • A map showing the location of the 100-year flood, conveyance, and high hazard flood zones relative to the project site. - SEE ATTACHED The proposed project lies within the 100-year, high hazard and conveyance zones of Goose Creek. The project will be designed in a way that will not create any negative impact to the Floodplain of Goose Creek. A City of Boulder Floodplain Development permit will be obtained. This project is partially within the riparian corridor for Goose Creek. A Greenways Riparian Habitat Assessment was conducted during the summer of 1999. This assessment evaluated the quality of riparian habitat along Boulder Creek and all of its tributaries, including Goose Creek. Ratings were determined for the quality of aquatic habitat, structure of the vegetation, the amount of native vegetative species and the variety of bird species present. This project lies within Riparian Habitat reach 3 along Goose Creek. The ranking for the aquatic habitat and native plant habitat was poor. The ranking for the vegetative structure was very poor and the bird species richness was ranked as good just upstream of the proposed project. This project will improve the quality of the riparian habitat by removing non-native vegetation from the project area and replacing it with native species. C. Wetlands 1. Describe any disturbance to or loss of a wetland on site which will result from the project. - SEE BELOW If potential impacts have been identified, please provide the following: A description of how the proposed project would avoid, minimize, or mitigate identified impacts. - SEE BELOW • A map showing the location of any wetlands on or near the site. Identify both those wetlands which are jurisdictional under city code (on the wetlands map in our ordinance) and other wetlands pursuant to federal criteria (definitional). - SEE ATTACHED The preferred alternative causes a minimum of impact to wetlands. The proposed project will not impact any regulatory wetlands, however construction impact will occur in the buffer zone. A City of Boulder wetland permit will be obtained. D. Geology and soils 8 i 1. Describe any: a. impacts to unique geologic or physical features b. geologic development constraints or effects to earth conditions or landslide, erosion, or subsidence c. substantial changes in topography which will result from the project. - No IMPACTS The project will not impact any geologic or physical features. E. Water Quality 1. Describe potential impacts to groundwater or stormwater quality which may result from the project. - No IMPACTS 2. Describe potential increases in stormwater discharges which may result from the project. - SEE BELOW 3. Describe potential water quality impacts to streams, ditches and other water bodies from the project. - SEE BELOW 4. Is there a likelihood of groundwater contamination from past history on the site or an adjacent site? - No IMPACTS The project will not increase discharges to storm or sanitary sewer systems. However, the project will relocate and extend the existing 42" storm sewer. The storm sewer currently discharges into Goose Creek on the upstream end of the box culverts. The project will change the discharge point to approximately 300 feet downstream of the box culverts. The project will extend the existing irrigation ditch flume approximately 25 feet. Water quality in the ditch will not be affected. Because of the extension of the 42" storm sewer, an existing catch basin located between the highway and the frontage road which discharges to an irrigation ditch, will be drained to the new 42" storm sewer extension. Construction activities within and near stream channels have the potential to impact water quality. Best Management Practices (City of Boulder Wetlands Guidelines) will be followed to minimize impacts. No contaminated groundwater impacts have been identified at the site. 9 F. Air Quality 1. Describe potential impacts to air quality resulting from this project. Distinguish between impacts from mobile sources (VMT/trips) and stationary sources (APEN, HAPS). - SEE BELOW The project will not cause air quality impacts, but has the potential to improve air quality by encouraging alternative transportation in the form of bicycling on the trail network. G. Resource Conservation 1. Describe potential changes in water use which may result from the project. - No IMPACTS a. Estimate the indoor, outdoor (irrigation) and total daily water use for the facility. b. Describe plans for minimizing water use on the site. 2. Describe potential increases in energy use which may result from the project. - No IMPACTS a. Describe plans for minimizing energy use on the project or how energy conservation measures will be incorporated into the building design. 1 Describe the potential for excess waste generation resulting from the project. Describe plans for recycling and waste minimization (deconstruction, reuse, recycling, green points). - No IMPACTS The project will not use water or energy, or generate waste. Initially, plantings will need to be watered to ensure establishment and survival. Plantings will be selected and located along the slope of the channel banks based on the water requirements of the plant and the water table associated with the stream. H. Cultural/Historic Resources 1. Describe any impacts to: a. a prehistoric or historic archaeological site. b. a building or structure over fifty years of age. C. a historic feature of the site such as an irrigation ditch. d. significant agricultural lands. 10 which may result from the project. - No IMPACTS The project will not impact any cultural or historic resources. There are no identified historic features in the project area. 1. Visual Quality 1. Describe any effects on: a. Scenic vistas or views open to the public. b. The aesthetics of a site open to public view. C. View corridors from the site to unique geologic or physical features. which may result from the project. - No IMPACTS The project will not increase the heights of the roadway surface, therefore there will be no effects on scenic views, or view corridors. J. Safety 1. Describe any additional health hazards, odors, or exposure of people to radon that may result from the project. - No IMPACTS 2. Describe any additional site hazards that may result from the project. (Including risk of explosion or the release of hazardous substances such as oil, pesticides, chemicals or radiation) - SEE BELOW The proposed project will improve safety by providing a grade-separated crossing of Foothills Parkway. Potential site hazards include collisions among users, risk to users during conditions of high water, and other path-related concerns. These hazards will be minimized by posting speed limit signs to reduce the speed of trail users, if needed, and by providing adequate sight distances for accommodating multiple users. The need for centerline striping on the path entering and exiting the underpass will be evaluated. K. Physiological Well-being 1. Describe the potential for exposure of people to excessive noise caused by any phase of the project. - SEE BELOW 11 2. Describe any excessive light or glare that may result from the project. - No IMPACTS 3. Describe any increase in vibrations that may result from the project. - No IMPACTS If potential impacts have been identified, please provide the following: • A description of how the proposed project would avoid, minimize, or mitigate identified impacts. - SEE BELOW During construction, noise related to heavy equipment operation will be generated during the daytime hours. No other phase of the project will have a negative impact on physiological well being. The project itself will enhance physiological well being by providing an outdoor recreational opportunity, relieving traffic congestion by providing alternative transportation options, and enhancing the environment in the project area. Lighting in the underpasses will be designed for safety purposes, and will not cause excessive glare. L. Services 1. Describe any additional need for the following services as a result of the project: - No IMPACTS a. health care/social services b. water or sanitary sewer services c. police services d. fire protection e. recreation or parks facilities f. libraries g. transportation improvements/traffic mitigation h. parking i. affordable'housing j. open space/urban open land k. power or energy use 1. telecommunications The proposed project will not increase the need for any of the above services or facilities. 2. Describe any impacts to any of the above existing or planned city services or department master plans as a result of this project. (e.g. budget, available parking, planned use of the site, public access, automobile/pedestrian conflicts, views) - No IMPACTS 12 There will be no impacts to any of the above existing or planned city services or department master plans as a result of this project. M. Special Populations 1. Describe any effects the project may have on the following special populations: - SEE BELOW a. persons with disabilities b. senior population C. children d. restricted income persons The project will be designed to achieve the lowest feasible slope and to meet ADA requirements as much as possible to ensure adequate use and participation in the trail system by persons with disabilities, seniors, and children. Appendix A: Vicinity Map Appendix B: Preliminary Project Design Drawings 13 APPENDIX B DRC Comments and Staff Responses to DRC Comments AGENDA ITEM # PaLQ 5 CITY OF BOULDER Department of Public Works/Transportation Division Box 791 1739 Broadway Boulder, Colorado 80306 (303) 441-3266 (303) 441-4271 FAX MEMORANDUM TO: Liz Hansen, Planning Department FROM: Debbie Ritter, Noreen Walsh, Public Works Dept. Transportation Division SUBJECT: Goose Creek Underpass at Foothills Parkway DATE: March 1, 2002 Attached is additional information in response to the comments received by the Development Review Committee (DRC) on the above-mentioned project. The DRC comments and responses will be included in the packet that will be presented to the Transportation Advisory Board (TAB). At the March 11, 2002 TAB meeting, the Board will hold a public hearing and consider a recommendation to the City Council on the CEAP for this project. The CEAP document and the TAB recommendation will then be forwarded to the City Council for call-up consideration at their April 2, 2002 meeting. Please at Noreen Walsh at ext. 4301 if you have any questions or require any additional information related to the review of this project. Cc: Stephany Westhusin, Transportation Mike Sweeney, Transportation Bob Harberg, Utilities Stuart Williams, Stuart Williams Consulting David Love, Love and Assocs. Dave Steinman, Professional Wetland Consultants F 03/01/02 Page 2 of 2 II. CITY REQUIREMENTS Access/Circulation 1. The path comes within a few feet of 47`h Street east of Foothills Parkway. Currently, there is no curb along this section of 47hStreet. Staff is concerned that traffic on 47" Street will not be buffered from the path and that traffic would have no barrier between the road and the path. Constructing a curb along 47th Street would provide a barrier between the road and the path and also remove clear-zone requirements for offsetting landscaping if landscaping were to be provided as a buffering element. Steve Durian, Public Works, 303-441-4493 Response: Staff plans to construct a curb along the west side of 47`h Street from the north edge of the relocated Foothills Parkway path to the ramp to 47th Street at the southerly edge of the project. This will provide a buffer between the road and path. In addition to this component, staff will include low-lying shrub landscaping between the relocated Foothills Parkway path and the curb to further support this buffer. 2. Foothills Parkway is CDOT right-of-way and should be contacted to assess the construction traffic control plans. Steve Durian, Public Works, 303-441-4493 Response: The city of Boulder is coordinating with CDOT on the project and will seek input and approval for the traffic control plans. Legal Documents Alternative analysis pursuant to a CEAP does not necessarily (and probably will not) satisfy alternative analysis required in the wetlands permit. Buffer areas are regulatory because often they provide necessary protection for the wetlands. Sue Ellen Harrison, CAO Response: Staff is submitting a city of Boulder Wetlands Permit application in accordance with city wetlands regulation. Ill. INFORMATIONAL COMMENTS Landscaping Staff suggests the use of landscape material (with or without the addition of a new curb) to provide a visual and practical buffer between the new path and 47th Street. Response: Staff plans to include low-lying shrub landscaping to provide this buffer. A landscape design and planting plan will be created to restore and enhance the project area. This plan will be in accordance with the city's revegetation rules and goals for low water use, low maintenance and integrated pest management policies. Miscellaneous Please consider creative ways to minimize the apparent length of the underpass to the pedestrian and bicyclist. Since this will be one of the longest underpasses in the city, features such as public art andfor skylights may be a helpful addition to adequate artificial lighting. The right-of-way in the project area is currently being used for parking, apparently for storage of vehicles being serviced by nearby businesses. Please note that project phasing should include adequate notification to these businesses of the upcoming project, the need for the vehicles to be moved, and possible subsequent enforcement action and towing. Response: Staff is investigating various options to address this issue including public art, lighting and providing adequate sight distance between entry and exit points.