Draft, Project Planning and Approval Process Handbook for CEAP, April 2003City of Boulder
Project Planning and Approval
Process I-Iandbook
for Capital Improvement Program Projects
Departmental Master Plans
Capital Improvements Program
Pro~ect Planning and Design
Community and Environmental Assessment Process
Pro~ect Engmeering and Final Design
Final Permittmg
Project Construction and Management
DRAFT
April 2003
Pro~ect Planning and Approval Process
Table of Contents
THE PROJECT PLANNING AND APPROVAL PROC~SS .................................................................................3
INTRODUCTiON ................................................................. ......................................................................................3
PuxroSE oF T[~ PPAP ...........................................................................................................................................4
PROCESS I~'OR PLANMNG AND RGVIEW OF CAPITAL PROJECTS ............................................................................4
Ro~ES IN THE PPAP ................................................................................................................................................6
PLANIYING CONTEXT ................................................................................................................................................7
I30ULDER VALLEY COMPREHENSIVE PLAN ............................................................................................................5
SUDCOMMUIYITY AND SUBAREA PI,ANS .................................................................................................................10
nF.PARTMENTAL MASTCR PLANNING ...........................................................................................................13
OVERVIEW .............................................................................................................................................................13
SCHCDULE FOR MASTGR PLAN UPDATCS .............................................................................................................14
I4
MASTER PLAN COORDINATION .............................................................................................................................
MAST~R PLAN FORMAT .................................................................................................... ....................................14
Format for Master Plans ... .. . . . ... . . . . . ... . . . . .
Calculat~on of Capital and Operahng Costs . .. . . .. . . .16
. . . .
Boderplate Language for Use m Master Plans . . .. . . .. . . . . . 16
REVIEW AND APPROVAL PROCGSS COR MASTCR YLANS ................................................. ....................................17
MASTER PLANNING PROCESS ROLES ...................................................................................................................18
CRITERIA FOR PLAM~ING BOARD REVIEW OF MASTGR PLANS ..............................~........ ....~...............................19
CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS PROCRAM AND BUDGET APPROPRIATION ......... ....................................21
OVERVIEW ......................................................................................................................... ....................................21
CRITERIA FOR DEFIN[NG MAdOR CIP PROJRCTS ............................................................ ....................................22
REVIEW AND APPROVAL PROCESS FOR THE ANNUAL CIP .............................................. ....................................23
CIP PxoCESS Ror.ES ......................................................................................................... ....................................24
PROJECT PLANNING AND D~SIGN .............................................................................. ....................................27
OveRV[eW ......................................................................................................................... ............................... ....27
THE CO&IMUNITY AND ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT PROCESS .................................. ....................................ZS
Cuidelenes for ldentifying Pro~ects that Requ~re the CEAP . ... • • 29
CEAP Review . ... . .. . .. . . . . . . . ... . . ., . . .. 30
CEAP Documentat~on ... . . ..... . .... . .. . . . . . . .. .. .... ... . . . 31
CEAP Reveew Roles . . .. . . .. . .... .. .... . . .. . . ...... . .. ... . .. 31
REVIEW AND APPROVAL PROCESS FOR CONCEPT P4ANS AND THE CEAP .........................................................32
Process for Pro~ects that Requ~re Concept and Site Revtew. . .. .... .. .. ... 32
Process for Projects that Only Requtre a CEAP . .. .. .. . 33
Process forAl! Other CIP Projects . . . . . .. .. . 35
PROJECT ENGINEERING AND FINAL DESIGN .......................................................... ....................................36
OvEeVt~W .............................................................................................................................................................36
Rr.v[EW PxocESS ..................................................................................................................................................36
FINAL PERMITTING ..............................................................................................................................................39
OVCRVIEW ...................................................................................................~.........................................................39
REV~Ew PeocESS ..................................................................................................................................................39
Process for Pro~eets that Requ~re /Judding, Flood, or R~ght-of-way Permus .. .. ...... . ... . .. ..... .... . ..39
PROJECT CONSTRUCTION AND MANAGEM~NT ........................................................................................41
OVCRVIEW ............................~............................................................................................ ............................~.......41
Pro~ect Planning and Approval Process
APPENDIX A: COMPARISON OF CITY PLANNING AND PROJECT D~VELOPMENT LEVELS........43
APP~NDIX B: CEAP DOCUMENT5 ...................................................................................................................47
•COVER SHEET .......................................................................................................................................................49
-CHECKLIST ...........................................................................................................................................................51
CHECKLIST QUESTIONS .........................................................................................................................................5~
Pro~ect Planning and Approvel Process
The Project Planning and Approvai Process
IntroducUon
This handbook outlines the Pioject Planning and Approval Process (PPAP) for all public capital
improvement pro~ects m the city of Boulder. The PPAP is the process for the ieview and
approval of city master plans and public capital improvement projects m Boulder The PPAP
Handbook describes, in detail, the procedures for each phase in the review and approval of ma~or
city pro~ects.
The PPAP was origmally developed and approved in 1992. Smce that time, several issues with
the review of master plans and capital pro~ects prompted revisions to the process. In 2001, the
City Council Environmental Sustamabil~ty Task Force listed improvements to the PPAP as one
of its areas of focus. The primary issue identified by task force members was that multiple city
goals were not always effectively balanced m the early stages of plamm~g ma~or capital
~mprovement projects. The purpose of the update to the PPAP was to•
• Ensme that city pro~ects are balancmg Boulder Valley Comprehensrve Plan (BVCP)
goals to the best extent possible;
• Ensure that city pro~ects are meetmg City PACE goals;
• Improve tnterdepartmental communication and cooidmation,
. Improve early coordmation and puMic input on pro~ects prior to final design and
construction, and
• Ensure consistency between pubiic and private development pro~ects.
The revised PPAP as described in this handbook emphasizes up-front review of ctty projects at
the conceptual planning phases, improving mterdepaztmental coordination; and early assessment
of potential impacts
This handbook is designed for use by city project managers, city staff involved in master
plamm~g or project review, boards, and City Council. Members of the public who would like to
provide input on city master plannmg, design, and construction projects may also fmd this
handbook useful.
Pro~ect Planning and Approval Process
Purpose of the PPAP
The primary purpose of the PPAP is to provide a
forum for staff and public mput on the design
and implementation of cap~tal improvement
projects. The PPAP is a mechamsm for the
review and approval of capital pro~ects with
respect [o city goals and potential environmental
and communrty impacts. The process is desigued
to provide clear opportunities for staff, cit~zen
and decision-maker mvolvement m the review
of cap~tal projects from master plamm~g through
construchon.
Process for Planning and Reulew of
Capital Prolects
This handbook descnbes the PPAP and mcludes
review and assessment procedures for each
phase in the process. Each phase in the PPAP is
descnbed m detail m the chapters listed below
Table 1 on page 3 summaiizes the primary steps
under each phase of the PPAP.
The Purpose of the PPAP is
to:
• FBCIII[8[0 interdepaztmental
coordmation on master planrung;
budgeting; and project plannmg,
design and construchon;
• E118U1'8 consistency witl~ city goals
and policies as expressed in the
Boulder Valley Comprehensive Plan
and department master plans;
• Promate consistency with private
development projects m the
application of city codes, regulations,
and adopted standards; and to
• Pre~lde effective and coordmated
publ~c mput on city pro~ect plamm~g
throughout the decis~on-making
process.
Phase 1: Departmental Master Planning
Phase 2: Capital Improvement Program (CIP) and Budget Appropriation
Phase 3: Pro~ect Planning and Design
Phase 4: Project Engineermg and Final Des~gn
Phase 5: Final Permrtting
Phase 6: Project Construction and Management
4
Pro~ect Plannmg and Approval Process
Table 1: The Project Planning and Approval Process for CIP Projects
1. Departmental Master Planning
a Master plan coordination and assessment by Master Plan Coordinahon Committee
b Revlew and recommendatlon by departmental edvisory board and Planning Board
c Clty Council revlew and acceptance of master plan
2. CIP: Budget Appropriation for Project Planning
a Presentation of CIP pro~ecis In ihe annual pro~ect sharing meehng with pro~ect managers
b Review of the CIP pro~ect Ilst by the director-level CIP Coordination Committee
c Review of CIP proJect Ilst by Interdepadmental CEAP Review Grouo to Idenhfy pro~ects requiring a CEAP, rewew proJects for
conslstency with master plans, and to recommend (urther revlew processes as needed
d Revlew and recommendation to City Council by departmantal advlsory board and Planning Board
e Ciry Councll revlew and adop6on of CIP with the budget
3. Project Planning and Deslgn
Projects that require Concept and Site Plan All other projects that require CEAPs (see page
Review (see page 27): 29):
a DRC Review ot Concept Plan (Concept Review) (CEAP a Revlew of CEAP checklist by CEAP Reviaw Group (The
checklist Is submltted with Concept Plan) committee could recommend technical document rawew by
b Planning Board ieviews and comments on concept plan ORC)
c DRC Review of Site Plan (Site Raview) b Advisory Board review and recommendetion of the flnal
d Wetland permit apphcations submdted (concurrent with CEAP and the preferred project altema0ve
ske revlew) c Ciry Counal call-up option
e Planning Board review and approval
f Cl~y Council call-up option
4. Project Engineering and Final Design
Projects that require Technical Document All other pro~ects:
Review:
a Review of final dasign and engineering plans through a Variances to the Design and Construction Standards are
Technical Document review (DRC) documented by the proJect manager, revlewed and
b Variances to the Design and Consiruchon Standards are approved by the Public Works Duector for Development
documented by the pro~ect manager, reviewed and and Support Services where epplicable
epproved by the Public Works director where applicable b Wetland and iloodplain permits are applied for if reqwred
c Wetland and floodplaln pertnits are applled for if
applicable (concurrent with site revlew if applicabla)
5. Final Permitting
Projects that require building, flood, or right-of-way permits:
a Permit review and issuance bV P&DS
6. Project Construction and Management
Projects that require building permits: Projects that require wetland permits and
a Building inspection by P&DS es requued mitigation monitoring:
b Right-of-way Inspection as requved a Annual wettand monitoring and reporting as required
Pro~ect Plenning end Approval Process
Roles In the PPAP
Project Manager:
The primary staff responsible for development of a department master plan or for the
planning, design, and construchon of a specific CIP pro~ect
PPAP Coordinator:
The staff person in the Planning Department responsible for coordmatmg the review and
approval of master plans, the CIP, and project CEAPs The PPAP Coordmator also
coordinates the Master Pian Coordination Committee and the CEAP Review Group.
Master Plan Coordination Committee:
The mterdepartmental staff team that meets on a quarterly basis to review and coordinate
updates to departmental master plans This comnuttee consists of master plan project
managers from all city departments
CIP Coordination Committee:
The director-level committee appointed by the city manager to review the annual CII' and
~dentify high-level policy, budget, or coordination issues.
CEAP Review Group:
The CEAP Review Group is the interdepartmental staff team responsible for the rev~ew
of the annual CIP and pro~ect CEAPs. The purpose of the group is to provide a forum for
mterdepartmental review and coordmation of major capital improvement projects. The
group meets on an "as needed" basis depending upon the number of project plans that are
ready for review. The role of the group is to
• Identify city pro~ects during the annual CIP review that should follow the CEAP or
other development review process;
• Evaluate city pro~ects for consistency with the goals and polictes of the BVCP and
departmental master plans;
• Insure that anhcipated impacts of crty projects are adequately evaluated and trade-offs
are appropriately balanced in the decision-makmg process;
• Improve interdepartmental coordination of city projects;
• Insure compliance with city standards and regulations; and
• Provide mformahon to the project manager to insure a successful pubhc process.
Pro~ect Planning and Approval Process
The CEAP Review Group consists of the following staff:~
Planning and Development Services:
PPAP Coordinator
Engineering Review Manager
Land Use Review Manager
Environmental Planner
Public Works - Utilities:
Public Works - Transportation:
Public Works - Facilities and Asset
Management:
Parks and Recreation:
Open Space and Mountain Parks:
Environmental Affairs:
Planning Context
Utilities Pro~ect Management Coordinator
Water Quality Coordinator
Greenways Projects Coordinator
Transportation Projects Coordinator
Transportation Operations and Planning
Coordinator
FAM Manager
Assistant Supermtendent of Parks, Plannmg,
and Construction
Environmental Planner
Environmental Sustainability Coordinator
Policies and goals in the BVCP, subcommunity and area plans guide planning for all city
services and facilities. (See Appendix A for a companson of city planrung documents.) Each of
these plans is progressively more detailed in documentmg community desires and needs and m
proposmg specific CIP projects to meet those needs. See Figure 1 on page 9 for an overview of
the planning context.
~ NOTE. Add~t~onal s[aff from other departments may he asked [o comment on a CEAP on a pro~ec[ by pro~ect
basis as determmed by the pro~ect manager or the CEAP Rev~ew Group
ProJect Planning and Approval Process
Boulder YalleY Comprehensiue Plan
The BVCP provides a general statement of the desired future development and preservation of
the Boulder Valley The BVCP is comprehensive m scope, building from its foundation as a
land use and urban service provision plan, mcorporating physical, social, and economic
concerns. The BVCP ~s an umbrella pohcy document, encompassmg shared needs and
aspirations in the commumty within which subcommunity, atea, and functional master plans are
developed. The components of the BVCP are:
• The BVCP polictes guide decisions about sustamability, growth, development,
preservahon, environmental protection, economic development, affordable housing,
culture and the arts, neighborhood character and transportation. They also inform
decisions about the manner m which vital services are provided, such as police, fire,
emergency medical services, water utilihes, flood control and human services.
• The Subcommunity and Area Plans provide plamm~g direction for spec~fic geographic
areas.
• The Master Plan and Program Summary section provides details for specific service
and program needs and prior~hes m the commumty
• The BVCP I,and Use Map defines the desired land use pattern for the Boulder Valley
regardmg location, type and intensity of development.
The Boulder Valley Planning Area is divided mto three ma~or areas
Area I is the area within the city which has adequate urban facilities and services and is
expected to contmue to accommodate urban development.
Area II is the area now under county jurisdiction where annexation to the city can be
considered consistent with the BVCP policies New urban development may only occur
coincident with the availability of adequate facilities and services and not otherwise.
Department master plans project the provision of services to this area within the planning
period Area IIA and IIB designations provide a basis for phasmg and tugeting capital
improvements to specific areas of the community Area IIA is the area of immediate
focus within the first three yeazs, and Area IIB is available to accommodate development
within the balance of the 15-year planning period.
Area III is the remaining area m the Boulder Vailey, generally under county~urisdichon.
Area III is divided into the Area III-Rural Preservarion Area, where the city and county
Pro~ect Planning and Approval Process
mtend to preserve existing rural land uses and character, and the Area III-Planning
Reserve Area, where the city and county intend to mamtain the option of expanded urban
development m the city beyond the time frame of the 15-year planning period.
Figure l: Relationship of the Boulder Valley Comprehensive Plan to City Regulations
and Other Planning Activities
Boulder Valley Comprehensive Plan
Policy document thaY sets the community's vision for the future
Includes poliaes regarding land use and development, the environment, transportation faalities,
economic development, affordable housing, culture and the arts, neighborhood character, and the
provision of public improvements.
Includes a land use map to indicate desired future land uses in the Boulder Valley. The land use
map guides zoning decisions and changes to the zoning regulatlons.
Subcommunity
And Area Plans
Plans that provide more
detaded planning for
subcommunities or distinct
neighborhoods
Project Planning and
Approval Process
Department Master Plans
Capital Improvements
Program and Budgeting
ProJed Planning and Design
Pro~ect Engineering and
Final Des~gn
Final Permitting
Pro~ect Construdion and
Management
Land Use Regulations
& Zoning
Regulations that Implement the BVCP and govern the use
and standards for development for a~l parcels in the city.
Includes a zoning map that delineates the locations of
zoning distncts in the aty.
Includes standards for development by zoning district,
e.g. allowed uses, allowed density, allowed floor area
ratios, reqwrements for setbacks, height, parking,
landscaping, open space, historic preservation,
affordable housing provision, solar access, etc
Implemenks poliaes set out in the BVCP through
various regulations.
Pohcies m the BVCP define ]ong-term communrty needs and desires, and they provide an overall
framework for the provision of serviccs and facilrties. The faciliries and services section of the
BVCP establishes policies linktng growth to service standards and provisions found in the BVCP
and to departmental master plans. With the mformation contained m the master plans and the
CIP, the timing of pnvate development and pubhc expenditures can be more effectively
coordinated Planning for the adequate provision of public facilittes is intended to promote
planned, rahonal and affordable growth so that residents are ensured equal a~d adequate service
provision
Conformmg to the general policy framework and growth phasmg of the BVCP, departmental
master plans are developed and periodically revised for each ma~or urban service. Master plans
identify specific facility needs and the type of caprtal improvements required to meet those
needs.
Major CIP projects are included in a six-year plan and are reviewed annually by the Planning
Boazd for consistency with the BVCP, subcommunity and area plans, and departmental master
plans. They are then approved by City Council m the annual budget.
Subcommunlty and Subarea Plans
Subcommunihes are groupings of neighborhoods withm the Service Area (See Figure 2 on the
following page.) Subcommunity boundaries are defined by physical boundaries such as roads,
distinct development character, and common public facilities The following subcommunrt~es
are defined in the BVCP:
North Boulder
Central Boulder
Crossroads
East Boulder
University of Colorado
Southeast Boulder
South Boulder
Gunbarrel
Within the general framework of the BVCP, subcommunity plans provide more detailed
planning for land use, urban design, neighborhood revitalization, and public facility needs As
part of subcommunity plans, area-specific needs for capital improvements are idenhfied and
fine-tuned Coordinated packages of CIf' projects are one way of implementing subcommunity
plans. Not all subcommumties, however, will have subcommumty plans.
10
Departmental Master Planning
The North Boulder Subcommunity Plan is the first subcommuruty plan to be developed and
adopted by Plannmg Board and City Counc~l. The plan was adopted in 1995 and is available in
the Planning Department. The purpose of the plan is to consciously preserve much of the present
character of the subcommunity and to ensure that future changes are beneficial to subcommunrty
citizens and to the city as a whole
The plan specifies ways that BVCP policies will be implemented in the North Boulder
subcommumty. The plan sets forward specific actions to be carried out by the city, other public
agencies, and the private sector m the commg years It estabhs6es a street and pedestrian/bicycle
network to which developing or re-developing areas must adhere. More detail about the purpose
and implementation of the North Boulder Subcommumty Plan may be found in the BVCP or on
the web at http //www c~ boulder co us/planrung/bvcp/bvcp2002 adf. Copies of the
subcommunity plan are available m the Planning Department.
Figure 2: Boulder Valley Comprehensive Plan Subcommunities Map
. . •-
•
~
~ . ~~
i ~
uwGr~ ~~,
'1•
~ ~
~
Y C ~g.,y
~
~k} u
u
Y j
~ z.~~
r
~ ~
~ i ~ l
v
s .,
~ GunynH
~;~~
j/•
p ~y
l
~Q~.~i~
v 1 a /
'
~ ^~
~ ~
~~M
~ l~a~
p
~
Z
~ , ~ ~ "~; i ~
-> g
~~i c
n ~
1
' NY /~
~a..a
.
r !!
~
•y.~weain ' E 4 1
I
~ R
N12w M
(}~.t'q~ c u R a
~•
" ~., ewnwumu
i w ~
_ ~~
~~ ~~
( ~~ +~l`
a
• p
~
" BMII&UbX ,
a
•~ -
~ ! ~•
.'' j
~ u.m^
"°`ntl
o~,~,~w.~ MAP 3
~M ~M ~w
N OMYn
11
A subcommunrty is composed of one or more subareas. A subarea has an idenhty that is distinct
from other areas within the subcommunity and generally consists of predorrunately residential
uses. Subarea plans are developed on a selechve basis when a finer gra~n of plamm~g than m
subcommunity plans is needed Like subcommuruty plans, subarea plans also can fine-tune and
coordmate capital improvements
Subarea plans have been adopted for the downtown, University H~ll and parts of the Boulder
Valley Regional Center (BVRC) The following area plans are adopted and available m the
Planning Department:
Downtown:
Downtown Plan (1992)
Boulder Valley Regional Center.
Boulder Valley Regionai Center Urban Renewat Plan (1979, modified m 1987)
Boulder Plaza Area Plan (1992)
Crossroads EasUSunrise Center Area Plan (1997)
University Hill:
University Hill Area Plan (1996)
The Transportation Division has developed the following netwark plans for subareas of the
transportation system. These plans are available in the Transportat~on Division.
Network Plans:
BVRC Transportation Connections Plan (1996, updated m 2002)
North Boulder Right-of-Way Plan
North 28~h St. Transportation Network Plan (2001)
East Arapahoe Transportation Network Plan (2003)
12
Departmental Master Planning
Departmental Master Planning
Overulew
Most departments have funcuonal master plans for the provision of services and facilities.
Master plans establish detailed policies, priorities, service standards, facility and system needs
and capital budgeting for the dehvery of specific services. They provide citywide programs to
correct existing facility deficiencies, to enhance existmg facilities and services, and to provide
new faciht~es to meet growth needs.
Master plans are developed consistent with the policies, plans, and population and employment
projections provided by the BVCP. They provide a common city framework for plannmg the
dehvery and fundtng of services, facilities, and programs. The facility and service prionties and
fundmg plan established through the master planning process provide the basis for capital
improvement programixung. Following master plan completion, rev~sed master plan summaries
are incorporated into the BVCP.
In some cases, master plans outlme whole system plans for public improvements. The
Greenways Master Plan, Comprehensive Drainage Utilities Master Plan and Transportahon
Master Plan are all examples of plans that lay out citywide networks for transportanon, flood,
and drainage improvements. Whole system plans elirrunate the need to review system
alternatives when specific pro~ect alternatives are being evaluated at the project planrung and
preliminary design stage. System alternarives may be evaluated through the review of master
plans and master plan updates. At the project planrung and design stage, the primary focus
becomes alternat~ve project types, locations, and functional designs - not system alternatives.
Master plans include short and long term implementation strategies and a financing plan. The
financing plan idenhfies the funds needed to implement programs and build capital
improvements. Acceptance of master plans by City Council provides direction on city priorities
for capital improvements. Capital fundmg, however, is not authorized with the acceptance of a
master plan.
13
Departmental Master Plannmg
Schedule tor Master Plan Updates
Major master plan updates should be conducted every five years m coordmahon with the ma~or
updates to the BVCP. Changes to the BVCP will include revised growth projections, policies,
the land use plan and plan implementation components. After adoption of these changes to the
BVCP, master plans should be revised the followmg year, consistent with the BVCP changes.
In between the major five-year updates to master plans, Plannmg Board and City Council may
direct staff to make sigmficant policy or program changes prior to the five-year update
t~meframe. Mmor updates to master plans and progress reports may occur annually.
Master Plan Coordinatlon
Master plans are coordmated among departments through the Master Plan Coordination
Committee. This committee meets quarterly and is convened by the PPAP Coordinator. The
coordmahon commrttee consists of staff mvolved m the development or implementation of
departmental master plans The purpose of the committee is to.
• Ensure that master plans are consistent with the BVCP and overall city pohcies and
objecUves,
• Provide pohcy and system level coordmation and commumcahon between specific
departments and master plans.
• Ensure use of consistent plamm~g mformation and forecasts m the development of master
plans;
• Review master plans and assess impacts of master plans on city programs, plans, and
pohcies.
Master Plan Format
The following presents a general framework for master plans Master plans should follow the
basic prototype outlined below to the extent possible in order to provide consistency among
departments in plan format and content. The framework may be modified to accommodate
vaziations in master plan scope, purpose and needs.
14
Departmental Mester Planning
Format for Master Plans
Executive Summary
• Overview of key issues, servtce standards, and recommendations contained m the
plan.
Introduction/Background
• Is it a new mas[er plan or an update~ When was it origmaliy developed? When were
the previous updates~
• Use/purpose of this particular plan and how it fits mto the larger city planrung context
(BVCP, growth assumptions, fmancial constramts).
• Services the department provides, service provision philosophy, key issues and
trends.
• Overview of the master plan contents
• Process used to develop the plan.
• Any other pertment background informaUon
Goals and Ob~ectaves of the Plan
Overview of Key Trends, Issues and Recommendat~ons
Plan Assumptions
• Service Area/land use/populahons/employment
• Service provision pohcies, standards
• Current fundmg
Analysis
• Assessment of existing services and facilrties
• Analys~s of existmg and future deficiencies, replacement and enhancement
needs.
The Plan
• Alternatives assessment (if needed)
• Proposed changes in service standards, services, programs, and facilIIies (five year
and long term if needed)
• Risks and opportuniries
• Policy issues with current update
• Implementation
• Financial impacts of proposed changes in service standards and other plan
recommendations
15
UepartmeNal Master Plamm~g
• Financial plan (cost pro~ections, funding sources)
Public Process
• Process for public inpuUparticipation in plan development
• Outcome of public input
Calculation of Capital and Operating Costs
Department master plans should ~dent~fy capital and associated operatmg needs to provide
services to both the existing city and the pro~ected boundaries of Boulder described in the service
area (Areas I and II) wrth the projected population and employment numbers provided by the
Planning Department. Capital needs should be further broken down into the following
categories:
Existing deficiencies: Caprta] facilities needed to provide the existmg
community with services defined by current service standards.
2. Enhancements: Capital facihties needed to provide an mcreased level of service
to the community.
3. Replacements: Capital facilrties that replace existing capital facilities.
4. Growth related: Capital fac~lities necessitated by new res~dential or
nonresidenhal growth.
It is unlikely that any one pro~ect falls neatly m any one category. It will be necessary to
determine the proportion of pro~ects that fall mto the various categories or to simply decide that
projects are predommantly one or another.
Boilerplate Language for Use in Master Plans
The following text may be included in master plans as in mtroduchon to the purpose of and
context for the master plan:
City master plans provide planning for the delivery and funding of city servaces,
programs, and facilities. The city's comprehensive plan, subcommunity plans,
and the long-range Financial Plan provede the overall pol~cy direction for the
plans.
16
Departmental Master Planning
The Boulder Valley Comprehensive Plan provides the overall policy framework
for future development in the Boulder Valley. The city's master plans are
developed consistent wath the polictes, plans, and population and employment
projections provided by the comprehensive plan. They provide planning for the
delivery and funcling of specific services, facilittes and programs, and identify the
costs associated with current deficaenctes and replacement needs, and those
associated with growth. The master plans establ~sh the policies, priorztie,s,
service standards, and faciliry and system needs for the delivery of specifcc
services. The facilaty and servcce praoraties and fund~ng plan establashed through
the master planning process provide the basts for capital improvement
programming and annual budgeting. Following completion of master plans,
revised policies, a master plan summary and update maps are incorporated into
the comprehensive plan.
The purpose of master plans is to:
• provide conszstency of fac~laty and service planning with overall city policies
and plans;
• provide financial and programmatic planning for facility and service
provi.sion;
• provide integratton and coordination of serv~ce prov~sion between
departments;
• guade capital improvement programm~ng and c~ty budgetang; and
• adentify costs associated with current system deficiencies and replacement
needs, and growth-related costs
Reulew and Approual Process tor Master Plans
The following is the generalized process for the review and approval of master plans.
This process includes ma~or milestones in master plan development. Most master plans,
however, will require involvement of the boards, City Council, staff and public in earlier
phases of the pro~ect includmg identificahon of the scope, goals, and objechves of the
master plan.
Step 1: Master planning scope, schedule and process is developed by the
department pro~ect manager.
Step 2: Overview of the plannmg process and schedule are presented to the
Master Plan Coordination Committee. The committee provides input
on the planrung process.
17
Departmental Master Plannmg
Step 3: Draft master plan is developed by the department (which may involve
extensive pubhc process outside of the PPAP).
Step 4: Draft master plan is reviewed by the Master Plan Coordination
Committee.
Step 5: The master plan is finalized for board and Council review.
Step 6: The departmenYs advisory board (where appl~cable) reviews the draft
master plan through a public hearmg and makes a recommendarion to
City Council
Step 7: The Planning Board reviews the draft master plan and considers a
recommendatron to the City Council. (Planning Board memo is written
by Plannmg Department staff and mcludes key issues for the board
and a Plamm~g staff recommendahon.)
Step 8: The City Council makes a motion to accept or not accept the master
plan thiough the pubhc hearmg process. (City Council memo is
written by the departrnent pro~ect manager.)
Step 9: A master plan summary and policy changes are adopted as part of the
next update to the BVCP.
Master Planning Process Rales
Department Project Manager:
• Manages update and review of departmental master plan.
PPAP Coordinator:
Convenes the Master Plan Coordinahon Committee;
Works closely with the project manager to ensure: 1) consistency of the master
plan with BVCP goals and policies; 2) that Plannmg Board concems are
addressed m the master plan; 3) use of a common database that provides detailed
demographic and land use trends and pro~ections; and 4) that adequate
information is mcluded on the facility and program costs;
Coordmates the review of the master plan by the Planning Board by providing an
analysis and recommendation to the Plamm~g Board.
18
Departmental Master Planning
City Managers Office:
• Provides policy direction on major policy issues.
Departmental advisory board:
• Reviews the master plan and makes a recommendation to City Council on the
acceptance of the master plan.
Planning Board:
• Reviews all master plans specifically for consistency with the goals, policies, and
growth pro~ections of the BVCP and subcommunity plans before the plan is
accepted by the City Council.
• Reviews mastei plans to ensure coordination and integrahon among departmental
programs and goals
. Makes a recommendation to City Council on the acceptance of the master plan.
City Council:
• Reviews master plans and makes a decision on fmal acceptance of the master
plan.
Crlterla for Plannlna Board Reulew ot Master Plans
The Planning Board's role m review~ng master plans is to look for consistency with the BVCP
goals and policies before the plans are adopted by the City Counc~l. Because of its role in
reviewmg the CIP, the Plamm~g Board also ieviews master plans to ensure that they identify
service standards, capital fundmg needs, and fundmg sources. The questions that are the focus of
the board's review are.
1. Is the master plan consistent with the goals, policies, and growth projections
of the BVCP?
2. Are lhe capital needs and funding sources outlined in the master plan?
19
Capital Improvements Program
Capital Imqrouements Program and Budget
Approprlation
oueruiew
Boulder's CIP is a six-year plan for physical public improvements. The CIP provides a forecast
of funds ava~lable for capital pro~ects and identifies all planned capital improvement pro~ects and
their estimated costs over the six-year period.
The CIP is an essentia] tool for implementing the Facilities and Services policies of the BVCP
and departmental master plans. The CIP schedules pro~ects that correct current faciLty
deficiencies and enhance the level of service for existmg residents. Pnoritization of CIP pro~ects
involves balancing competing needs of the community, correcting service deficiencies for
existing residents, enhancing service levels for the community as a whole, and providing services
to new development.
The definition of a CIP pro~ect (as compared to an operation budget project) is as follows•
CIP projects are any major pro~ects requirang the expendtture of publtc funds
(over and abave operation expenditures) for the purchase, construction, or
replacement af the physical assets of the community. This broad definitaon
includes those projects that are bondable and includes new or expanded physical
facalities as well as the land necessary for a project.
The CIP is prepared and adopted on an annual basis. In the sprmg of each year, city departments
develop and submit specific information on projects for the six-year CIP to the Plamm~g
Department. This mformation includes pro~ect descriphons, justifications, discussion of pro~ect
goals, and estimates of pro~ect costs.
A determmation is made by the tndividual departments on what CII' pro~ects are to be scheduled
in the six-year time frame of the CIP. Funding priorities provided by master plans are either
reaffirmed or modified at this stage. For major pro~ects, funds for project planning, design, and
construction aze scheduled. Scheduimg pro~ect funds in the CIP budget sets m mot~on the PPAP
that results in eventual construction of most projects.
21
Cap~tal Unprovements Program
The first year's program m the CIP is adopted by the City
Council as the Capital Budget, as a counterpart to the
annual Operating Budget. Even though fiscal resources
are appropriated only in the first year of the CIP, the
succeedmg five years of the CIP are important m
providing a long-term plan for setting spending priorities,
scheduling pro~ects in a logical sequence, and
coordmating and targehng CIP projects for all city
departments
Each year the CIP is updated by addmg a new sixth year
of capital improvement projects. Ad~ustments are made
to costs and revenues forecasted the previous year.
Changes may also be made to the year(s) in which a
project is scheduled, reflecting changes m fiscal
conditions and changes in overall fundmg priorities. New
capital pro~ects may be added or deleted based on new
facility needs identified in updated or new city master
plans, area plans, or studies. Capital improvements also
may be on-gomg lme items to address contmual capital
needs.
Crlterla for Deflning Ma1or CIP Prolects
Objectives of the CIP Review
and ApprovaiProcess
• Stl'CIIgIhCll Plamm~g Board
and City Council involvement
and oversightofthe CIP.
• PI'OYIdC a clear and efficient
process for the review and
budgehng of capital projects.
• ES[8411Sh effective
mechanisms for community
input m capital improvement
budgeting.
• PI'OYidB a mechanism for
mtegrating multiple
commumty goals in capital
project planning.
1. CIP projects must be major items. $50,000 is the rxunimum threshold to be part of
the C1P Budget (as opposed to the operating budget). The project total amount
considered for the threshold for the entire cost of the pro~ect, includmg previous
years' expenditures, funds for the CIP 6-yeu period, and projected costs beyond
the time frame of the CIP. Each segment of multi-phase projects does not have to
be over $50,000, only the total project must meet this criteria
2. Capital projects have to be durable and have a long useful life. Capital
improvements should include only those expenditures for physical facilihes wrth a
useful life of at least 15 years.
3. Capital improvements should not include consumable items or short-lived
equipment or services. These should be requested in the Operahng Budget and
may be included in the citywide Ma~or Maintenance/Equipment account for
General Fund departments.
22
Captlal Improvements Program
4. Capital improvements should not be recurring items, but discrete, one-time
expenditures
5. Capital improvements should be discrete pro~ects that are facility- and location-
specific.
Reulew and Approual Process Tar the Mnual CIP
Step 1: The department selects capital pro~ects for mclusion in the CIP based on
prioiities identified m the master plan.
Step 2: Project managers estimate the budgets for projects and recommend CEAP and
other review requirements.
Step 3: The followmg pro~ect information is submitted to the PPAP Coordinator for
inclusion m the CIP.
• Project description and justification
• CosUrevenue estimates
• Evaluation of apphcable citywide and master plan goals
• Recommended processes for project review and approval
Step 4: The CIP list is prepared by the PPAP Coordmator and reviewed at the
staff level by the following groups•
1) CIP Coordination Committee - to identify ma~or budget issues, city-
wide policy issues, opportunities for pro~ect coordmation, or ma~or project
conflicts;
2) CEAP Review Group - to idenufy pro~ects that will require a CEAP,
review projects for consistency with master plans, and racommend further
review processes as needed;
3) Annual Capital Project Information Sharing Meeting (pro~ect
managers) to provide mformanon and coordmate projects.
Step 5: After staff-level input, the CTP is reviewed by the Plannmg Board for
the followmg:
• Crty-wide pro~ect coordinahon
• Consistency with master plans
• Balance of city-wide goals
23
Capval Lnprovements Program
• Required processes for project review and approvai
Step 6: After considermg compatibility with master plans and "big-picture"
policy issues, Planning Board makes a recommendation to City
Council on adoption of the CIP and budget.
Step 7: The CII' and budget are reviewed by the Cdy Council. The City
Council may approve, not approve, or approve with amendments the
budget appropriation for CIP pro~ects.
CIP Process Roles
Department Project Manager or Coordinator:
• Submits pro~ect informahon for the CIP to the PPAP Coordmator and makes an
imUal recommendation on review and approval requirements for mdividual
pro~ects
PPAP Coordinator:
• Coordmates preparation of the CIP;
• Makes recommendations to Planning Board on CIP policy issues and priorities.
CIP Coordination Committee (Director-level):
• Reviews the CIP and idenufies major budget issues, city-wide policy issues,
opportunities for project coordmation, or major project conflicts.
CEAP Review Group:
• Reviews CII' list and makes recommendations on further review and approval
requrrements for individual projects.
City Managers Office:
• Provides direchon on poltcy issues.
Departmental advisory boards:
• Reviews departmental CIP list and makes a recommendation to Plannmg Board
and City Council on adoption of the CIP
Planning Board:
24
Caprtal Improvements Program
• Reviews and evaluates ali CIP pro~ects for consistency with the goals and policies
of the BVCP, subcommumty plans, and master plans before the CIP is adopted by
the City Council.
• Makes recommendations on the proposed review processes for individual
pro~ects,
• Makes recommendations on [he scope, priorities, and scheduling of CIP projects,
• Makes recommendations on resolvmg policy issues ra~sed by the proposed
location and design of CIP pro~ects;
City Council:
• Approves the first year CIP as part of the budget approval.
25
Pro~ect Plamm~g and Des~gn
Project Pianning and Design
ouerulew
The Pro~ect Planning and Design stage for ma~oi capital improvement pro~ects takes a pro~ect
outlined in a master plan and provides more detailed planning to determine its preferred type,
location, and conceptual des~gn. Evaluation of the full range of project alternatives (mcluding
project type, location, functional design alternatives) occurs at this stage, mcluding assessment of
the comparative impacts of selected ma~or alternatives The assessment of impacts occurs
through the Community and Environmental Assessment Process (CEAP) described later in this
chapter.
7'he process for review and approval of individual capital projects is identified during the
annuat CIP and budget approval process. At this time, one of three processes may be
identified for a specific project:
Concept Plan and Site Plan review (inciudes the C~AP): This process is
required by code for pro~ects that exceed the thresholds outlmed in B R.C. Title 9,
Section 9-4-11 (b) Development pro~ects on sites at least 5 acres m size and in
the P-E zorung district are usually required to apply for concept and site review.
2. CEAP Review Group review. This is an interdepartmental staff team formed to
provide coordmated input on capital projects and CEAPs at a couceptual phase.
Pro~ects that require a CEAP are identified during the annual C1P and budgeting
process. The group meets on an as-needed basis and are coordinated by the PPAP
Coordmator in the Planning Department.
3. No concept review: Some capital pro~ects may require no review at either the
Project Plannmg and Design or Pro~ect Engineermg and Final Design stages.
These projects may, however, require departmental advisory board review
according to individual departmental procedures
Table 2 below outlmes the basic processes for conceptual review of capital projects. A detailed
description of each process follows the table.
27
Prqect Plannmg and Design
Table 2: Process for Project Planning and Design Review and Approval
Project Planning and Design
Concept and Site Plan CEAP Review Group No Concept Plan Review:
Review:
Review:
1 Development Review
Commiflee review of Concept
Plan (Conceot Revlew)
2 Planning Board rewews and
comments on concept plan
3 Development fieview
Commdlee Review o( Site Plan
(Site Review)
4. Wetland and Floodplain permit
applications submitted
(concurrent wrth sRe rewew)
5 Planning Board review and
approval
6 City Counal call-up option
Review and discussion of
CEAP documentation by the
CEAP Rewew Group (wdh the
pro~ect manager).
Adwsory Board review and
recommendation of the final
CEAP and the preferred
pro~ect alternative
City Counal call-up option
Follow recommendations
outlmed by the CEAP Review
GrOUD during annual CIP
review and approval for further
Technical Document and
permit review durmg Pro~ect
Engmeenng and Final Design
The Community and Enulronmental Assessment Process
The Community and Environmental Assessment Process (CEAP) is a formal review process to
consider the impacts of pubLc development projects. The CEAP was instituted by Crty Council
in 1987 and is referenced m the Boulder Revised Code (B.R.C. Section 2-1, Appendix IX,
Procedure in Handling Ma~or Capital Improvement Projects).
The purpose of the CEAP is to assess potential impacts of conceptual project alternatives in
order to inform the selection and refinement of a preferred alternative. The CEAP provides
the opportunity to balance multiple community goals in the design of a capital project by
assessing a project against the policies outlined m the BVCP and departmental master plans. The
CEAP allows "fatal flaws" mherent m the concept design of a pro~ect to be discovered, thereby
suggesting eliminaUOn of certam alternahves.
28
Pro~ect Plannmg and Des~gn
Guidelines for ldentifying Projects that Require the CEAP
Pro~ects that will require the CEAP review are identified during the annual CIP and budget
process. A department flrst suggests projects that w~ll need to follow the CEAP with their CIP
and budget submittal to the PPAP Coordinator The CEAP Review Group revtews all projects
listed in the annual CIP and identifies the appropriate review and approval process for each
pro~ect. The list is then reviewed by the Planning Board and adopted by the City Council with
the budget.
The following list provides a set of criteria for selectmg projects that should be evaluated
through the CEAP. This list provides general guidance to the CEAP Review Group m
identifying CEAP projects. CIP projects that
meet at least one of the following criteria Purpose of the CEAP
would l~kely benefit from the CEAP. Projects
that do not stricfly meet any of the followmg Achieve Multiple City Goals
criteria may require a CEAP as determmed by =~ Implement the Boulder Valley
[he CEAP Review Group or the Planning Comprehensive Plan and Departmental Master
Board:
1 A project or a potenUal
alternative could have a
significant impact on an
environmental, social, or
culturaliesource.
2. The pro~ect is anticipated to
generate enough neighborhood
or community controversy to
require a publtc hearmg or
board review.
3. There is more than one possible
conceptual alternative that will
require staff or commuruty input
in the selection.
4. The pro~ect requires external
review on the county (1041),
state, or federal level (NEPA).
(An mternal city CEAP should
be performed prior to
submrttmg to the externa]
agency.)
Plans
aa. Recogmze and mtegrate mulUple commumty
goals and mterests m smgle pro~ects
r.- Minimize env~ronmental, social, and fiscal
~mpac[s of pro~ects
M Idenufy oppor[umhes to improve capital
pro~ects through pro~ect plannmg and rev~ew
process
:~ Assure mternal compliance wrth crty pohcies,
goals, and regulahons
Achieve Service Efficiency
a~ Mmimize impacts to o[her service delivery
goals and master plans.
>y Achieve efficiency m plannmg and spendmg
for caprtal ~mprovemen[s.
Maintain Effective Public Involvement
a~ Effecuvely manage boazd, City Councd, and
publ~c mput on pro~ect plannmg and
implementatton
29
Pro~ect Plnnnmg and Design
CEAP Review
Once a pro~ect is budgeted, the pro~ect manager develops alternative concept designs. The
pro~ect manager then contacts the PPAP Coordinator and provides nohce of an upcommg CEAP
for review. (Notification must be at least 2 weeks in advance of the standing review meetmg
CEAP documents must be submitted to the PPAP Coordinator at least two weeks prior to the
standing review meeting )
The pro~ect manager completes the CEAP documentation
(see below) and subm~ts it and the concept plan
alternatives to the PPAP Coordinator. The PPAP
Coordmator gives nohce of a meetmg with the CEAP
Review Group and distributes the pro~ect documentat~on
to the appropriate staff. The CEAP Review Group meets
with the pro~ect manager to review the concept plan
alternahves and discuss the commumty and environmental
assessment. Staff may either submit written comments to
the PPAP Coordmator ar the PPAP Coordmator may take
minutes and provide the overall group comments to the
project manager. The followmg questions guide the staff
review of the CEAP:
Important Notel
The review and approval of the
CEAP by the advisory board
should be completed prior to the
completion of pro~ect engineering
and final design documents and
prior to board review to insure
that staff, board, and public input
has been incorporated into the
final engineering and design of
the project.
Does staff agree with the impact assessment ~
a Is the analysis complete and accurate ~
b Are there issues that are not identi~ed in the assessment ~
c. Are there follow-up questians or issues that need to be addressed?
2. Does staff agree wath the preferred alternatave as edentified by the project
manager?
a. Are the trade-offs of the preferred alternative acceptable?
b. Are there potenkal conflicts wzth other CIP projects ~
c. Are there potential regulatory issues that need to be resolved praor to ftnal
desagn and construction ~
3. Are there antic~pated community concerns or publ~c process considerations that
should be addressed ~
4. Is ihe CEAP ready for board revaew?
30
Pro~ect Plamm~g and Des~gn
CEAP Documentation
CEAP documentation consists of the following components:
• Pro~ect description,location map,conceptual design graphics,
• Discussion of the BVCP and master plan goals that the pro~ect will address;
• Descriprion of all alternatives considered and why the proposed alternative was
selected;
• Review of the impacts of the pro~ect in checklist form;
• Description of the proposed impact mrtigation measures and their estimated costs
The followmg documents are used for the CEAP. Complete forms may be found in Appendix C:
1. CEAP Project Background form
2. CEAP Checklist
3. CEAP Discussion of Impacts (for impacts identified in the checklist)
CEAP Review Roles
Department/Project management team:
• Facilitates plannmg and design of project.
• Develops and selects proposed pro~ect alternatives.
• Completes CEAP evaluahon and submrts to CEAP Review Group for review
• Submits CEAP mcludmg staff and public mput to the advisory board for approval
PPAP Coordinator:
• Coordmates the CEAP Review Group.
CEAP Review Group:
• Reviews concept plans and CEAPs for consistency with city policies, master plans,
and Boulder Revised Code
• Provides input on balancmg city goals and policies in the design of major CIP
projects;
• Provides direction to project managers on recommended review processes.
• Identifies potenhal `Yed flags" associated with mdividual projects.
Departmental Advisory Board:
• Gives final direction and approval to the department on the CEAP and the preferred
31
Prqect Plamm~g and llesign
conceptual altemative for a pro~ect.
Planning Board:
• Reviews and comments on Concept Review pro~ects
• Reviews and approves Site Review projects.
• Gives fmal direction to the pro~ect manager on the CEAP and concept plan for
projects from departments with no advisory board (Library, FAM, Fire, Police, HHS)
City Council:
• Has cal]-up option on advisory board or Plannmg Board d~rection
Reulew and Approval Process for Concept Pians and the CEAP
Process for Projects that Require Concept and Site Review
Step 1: Pro~ect manager completes requirements for concept plan submittal
~ncludmg CEAP documentation
Step 2: A Concept Plan Review application is submitted to Planning and
Development Serv~ces (P&DS) on the ls~ or 3`d Monday of the month
between 8•00 a.m and 12.00 noon. (CEAP checklist is submitted wrth
Concept Plan Review application).
Step 3: The application is processed by P&DS and assigned to a Current Planner.
Step 4: DRC Review of concept plan (Concept Review). (See the Boulder
Revised Code, Title 9, Chapter 4 for a description of the development
review process.)
Step 5: Advisory board review and recommendation on concept plan and CEAP.
Step 6: Planning Board review and comment on concept plan and CEAP.
Step 7: Project manager prepares site plan documentation based on the input
received during Concept Review.
Step S: A Site Review application is submitted to Planning and Development
Services (P&DS) on the 15L or 3`d Monday of the month between 8:00 a m.
and 12:00 noon.
32
Pro~ect Plannmg and Des~gn
Step 9: The applicat~on is processed by P&D5 and assigned to a Current Planner
Step 10: DRC review of site plan.
Step 11: Wetland and floodplam permit applicahons submitted (concurrent with
site review)
Step 12: Plannmg Board review and approval of site plan.
Step 13: City Council call-up optton.
Step 14: Pro~ect manager fmahzes plans and subrruts Technical Drawings to P&DS
for review.
Process for Projects that Only Require a CEAP
Step 1: The project manager develops preliminary concept plans for project
alternatives (pro~ect types, locations and function designs).
Step 2: The project manager noti£ies the PPAP Coordmator of the project and
requests a review by the CEAP Review Group (Noufication to the PPAP
Coordinator must be at least two weeks m advance of the standmg meeting
date of the CEAP Review Group )
Step 3: The project manager prepares the following CEAP documentation and
submrts it to the PPAP Coordinator two weeks in advance of the CEAP
Review Group scheduled meetmg date:
CEAP Project Background
CEAP Checklist
CEAP Discussion of Impacts (for impacts identi~ed in the
checktist)
Step 4: The CEAP Review Group meets with the project manager to review and
discuss the project documentation followmg the guidmg questions
outlined under CEAP Review above.
Step 5: The PPAP Coordmator summarizes the discussion with the CEAP Review
Group and forwards the comments to the project manager. The pro~ect
33
Pro~ec[ Plamm~g and Design
manager may choose to
redesign elements of the
project to address ma~or
issues raised by staff and
re-submit the CEAP for
review or move on to the
nextstep m the process.
Step 6: The project manager
provides pubhc notice of
the CEAP and project
plans prior to the board
hearing (or as determined
by the pioject manager)
Step 7: A pubhc hearmg is held
with the primary advisory
board for the department
(see sidebar on this page
for a list of boards by
pro~ect fundmg). The
board reviews the CEAP
fmdings mcluding staff
and public comments. The
advisory board provides
direction to the project
manager on further pro~ect
planning
a If the boazd
recommends that the
pro~ect proceed to
Project Engineering
and Final Design, the
project
recommendation and
CEAP are forwarded
to City Counc~l and
subject to City Council
call-up.
b. If the board
Review Boards by Project
Funding
Transportation funded projects:
Transportation Advisory Board public
hearing and recommendation
Parks and Recreationfunded projects:
Parks and Recreation Advisory Board
public hearing and recommendation.
Utilities funded projects:
Water Resources Adwsory Board public
hearing and recommendation
Greenways funded projects:
Greenways Advisory Committee public
hearmg and recommendation.
Pro~ects within a designated Greenway
that are funded by other departments
(non-Greenways projects):
• Non-agenda memo sent to Greenways
Advisory Committee and other relevant
boards for comment
• Public hearing and recommendation by
advisory board of primary funding
department.
Open Space and Mountain Parks funded
projects:
Open Space Board of Trustees public
hearing and approval
Library, Fire, Police, Facilities and
Assets Management, Downtown and
University Hill Management, Housing
and Human Services, all other
departments:
Planning Board public hearing and
approval.
Projects with multiple board interests
(includes public works projects on
Parks or Open Space lands):
Public hearing and approval by relevant
boards in a ~oint board hearing
34
Pro~ect Plamm~g and Des~gn
recommends that the concept plan and CEAP findings require major
revisions, the project manager may be directed to redesign the project
or to provide more detailed analysis of certain impacts and mingation
strategies.
a If sigmficant project modifications are made, the CEAP is revised and
resubmitted to the CEAP Review Group for review. The same process
is repeated until the pro~ect is accepted m concept by the advisory
board.
Step 8: The advisory board fmdings are subject to City CouncIl call-up. If
the recommendarion by the board is called up, Council holds a
public heumg and makes a project approval decision. If Council
does not call up the pro~ect, then the advisory board direction is
final.
Step 9: Once both the advisory board and City Council approve pro~ect
recommendations and the CEAP, the pro~ect is ready for Pro~ect
Engmeermg and Final Design.
Process for All Other CIP Projects
No concept plan review external to the department is required Projects may, however,
require Technical Document Review or pernuts through Plannmg and Development
Services. (See Phase 4- Pro~ect Engmeermg and Final Design )
35
Pro~ect Engineering and Final Design
Project Engineering and Final Deslgn
oueruiew
The Pro~ect Engineermg and Final Design phase of the PPAP begms after the CEAP has been
completed and a preferred concept plan has been reviewed and selected by the departmental
advisory board. Only those pro~ects that have been designated for Techmcal Document review
or other specific perm~ts from Plannmg and Development Services require any review and
approval durmg this phase.
Reulew Process
Step 1: Detailed design plans and engineering drawmgs are developed under
the supervision of the project manager
If Technical
Document Review is
required:
All other projects:
Step 2: Project engineenng and
landscape plans are submitted
to the Planrung and
Development Services office
(P&DS) for Technical
Document rev~ew if:
a. The pro~ect has been
recommended for
Techmcal Document
Review by the CEAP
Review Group, or
b. The pro~ect will require a
building permit under the
conditions of the Boulder
Step 2: Variances to the Design
and Constructton
Standards or Boulder
Revised Code are
documented by the
project manager and
submitted to the Public
Works Dtrector for
Development and Support
Services for teview and
approval.
Proceed to Step 6 below.
36
Final Pecmrtting
Revised Code
Variances to the Design and
Constructaon Standards or the
Boulder Revised Code are
documented by the pro~ect
manager in the application
packet.
Technical documents may ba
submitted to P&DS on either
the 151 or 3`d Monday of the
month between 8:00 a.m. and
12:00 noon.
5tep 3: Technical document
apphcations are assigned a case
manager and track number and
reviewed by the Development
Review Committee (DRC).
Step 4: Final variances to the code and
DCS aze reviewed and
approved the Public Works
Director for Development and
Support Services where
applicable.
Step 5: The review period is three
weeks, after which the
techmcal documents are
approved or revisions are
requested
Step 6: Wetland and floodplain pernuts are applied for if required (or concurrent
with site review if apphcable).
37
Final Permittmg
Ouerulew
Final Permitting
The Final Permitting phase of the PPAP is only necessary for CIP projects that are
required to obtain buildmg, flood, or right-of-way permits Projects that require final
permits would be identified durmg the Pro~ect Plamm~g and Design phase by the Pro~ect
Coordmation Group.
Reulew Process
Process for Projects that Require Building, Flood, or Right-of-way Permits
Step 1: The pro~ect manager subrruts final plans to P&DS for buildmg,
flood, right-of-way or other permtts as required and pays the
associated fees
Permit applications may be sub~utted to P&DS Monday through
Friday before 4:00 p m.
Step 2: The permit application is processed by P&DS staff and tracked for
review.
Step 3. The application is reviewed and a pernut is issued or revisions are
requested.
Step 4. Once all permits ue obtained, the project is ready for construction.
39
Praject Construction and Management
oueruiew
Pro~ects that require a building, right-of-way or wetlands permitting also require construction
and post-construction follow-up by P&DS staff The requirements for permit follow-up are
outlined below.
Projects that require building or right-of-way permits:
a. Buildmg ~nspection by P&DS as required.
b Right-of-way mspecUon as required.
Projects that require wettand mitigation monitoring:
a. Annual wetland monitoring and reporting is required by code for a five-year period as
outlmed m B.R.C. Section 9-12-11. Specific requirements for monitoring reports can be
obtamed frorri the floodplain and wetlands engmeer in P&DS.
41
Pro~eci Construction and Manegament
Appendix A: Comparison of CitY Planning and Prolect
Deuelopment Leuels
What it is... What it contains... What it does...
Boulder Valtey
Comprehensive
Plan (BVCP)
The BVCP prov~des the
general statement of the
des~red long-[erm future
developmen[ and
preservahon of the
Boulder Valley. The
BVCP is comprehensrve
m scope, bmldmg from
its foundaUon as a land
use and urban serv~ce
provis~on plan,
mcorporaung phys~cal,
soc~al, and econom~c
concerns
It contams policies,
subcommunity and area
plan summanes, c~ty
master plan and program
summanes, a land use
map wuh des~gnatwns for
land m the Ciry's seivice
area, and a map that
~denhfies where the Cuy
may annex land and
provtde urban services
I[ serves as an umbre(la
policy document,
encompassmg shared
needs and asp~rahons m
the commumty, wi[hm
wh~ch subcommumty,
area, and functional
master plans are
developed.
Subcommunity
Plans
(Nor[h Boulder
Subcommunrty Plan)
Area Plans
Subcommumty plans are
a tool for applymg the
BVCP over-archmg
vis~on and poLcy
framework to the areas
called subcommumues
Subcommunrties are
funchonally related,
d~sunc[ groupmgs of
neighborhoods and
related commerc~al
subareas defined for
ptannmg purposes
Area plans address
plamm~g issues at a more
deta~led level [han [he
BVCP or subcommunrty
plans Areas are dishnct
distr~cts within
subcommumhes,
cons~sung of
predortunantly residenhal
uses or predommantly
commerc~al or
employment uses
Subcommunity plans
contam detailed land use,
commumty facihty, and
urban des~gn plannmg
and implementauon
ob~ectives and strateg~es
Detailed phys~cal plan for
fu[ure development of a
par[icular azea mcludmg
such factors as zomng,
community design,
transportahon plan,
alternate mode
connections, and other
public improvements
Subcommumty plans
provide a Imk between
the BVCP and
departmental master plans
by allowmg detailed
exammauon of the
m[errelattonships among
d~fferent phys~cal, soc~al,
economic, and serv~ce
sys[ems Coordmated
packages of CIP pro~ects
are one ou[come of
subcommunity plans
Area plans will be
developed forsubareas
w~th special problems or
opportumGes not
adequately addressed by
subcommumty plans
The BVCP and relevant
subcommun~ty plans
provide the broader
contex[ for area plans
43
What it is... What it contains... What it does...
Master Plans
Master plans deal wuh
service del~very systems,
facihties and programs
The funchonal master
plans are developed
consistent with [he
pohcies, plans, and
~mplementat~on
framework m the BVCP
and subcommun~ty plans
They provide system-
w~de programs to correct
exishng faciLty
deficienc~es, ro enhance
ex~stmg facil~hes and
serv~ces, and [o prov~de
new facil~ues to meet
growth needs Master
plans provide pnonhes
for schedulmg and
targeung capdal
~mprovements
They es[abLsh the
poLcies, priormes,
serv~ce s[andards, and
facility and system needs
for the delivery of
spec~fic services The
facilrty and service
pnonhes and fundmg
plan estabLshedthrough
the master plamm~g
process provide [he bas~s
for capital improvement
programming and annual
budgetmg
Capital
Improvement
Program (CIP)
Project Planning
and Approval
Process (PPAP)
The CIP ~s a mulU-year
plan for publ~c physical
improvements startmg
with the next fiscal year
This ~s the process by
which capital
tmprovement pro~ec[s are
planned, budgeted and
constructed
The CIP prov~des a
forecast of funds
available for capital
pro~ects and identifies all
planned capUal
~mprovemen[ pro~ects and
their esuma[ed costs over
the five-year penod
Several steps are mvolved
m the process mcludmg,
fac~6ty concept plannmg,
pro~ect plannmg and
prehmmary des~gn,
projectapprovalfor
preliminary design,
budgetappropnahonfor
pro~ect construction,
pro~ec[ engmeenng and
final design, and pro~ect
construchon and
management
The CIP ~s an essenhal
implementat~on tool For
carrymg out the BVCP
poticies of orderly and
efficient provision of
urban facilrties and
services BVCP polm~es,
land use designahons,
urban servtce standards,
and growth phasing
prov~de the big-p~cmre
contextforthc CIP
The process provtdes a
framework for consistent,
plannmg, budgetmg, and
publ~c rev~ew of cap~tal
improvement pro~ects
CommUnlty and A formal rev~ew process The CEAP mvolves a The CEAP prov~des a
EttV'1POnlll¢ntal to consider the impacts of checkl~st of potential framework for balanced
Assessment P1'ocess Pubhc development social and environmental and thoughtful
(CEAP) pro~ects. impacts to gwde analysis cons~deratron of
and companson of environmental and social
conceptual pro~ect issues m the preliminary
44
What it is... What it contains... What it does...
al[ernahves, plannmg and des~gn of
cap~tal ~mprovement
pro~ec[s I[ also provtdes
a forum for pubhc
d~scussion of broad level
projec[ ~ssues relahve to
depaztmental master plans
and overall commumty
goals It ts a tool to atd m
the development and
refinemen[ of pro~ect
des~gn and impact
mrt~gat~on ophons
45
City Of Boulder
Community and Environmental Assessment Process
-Couer Sheet-
1. Description and location of the project:
2. Background, purpose and need for the project:
3. Description of project alternatives and summary of major issues:
4. Preferred project alternative:
5. Public input to date:
6. Staff project manager:
Other consu(tants or relevant contacts:
Goais Assessment:
1. Using the BVCP and department master plans, describe the primary city goals and
benefits that the project wili help to achieve:
Sustamability
Community Design
Facilities and Services
Environment
Economy
Transportation
Housing
Social Concems and Human Services
2. What are the trade-offs among city policies and goals in the proposed project
aiternative? (e.g. higher ~nancial investment to gain better long-term services or
fewer environmental impacts)
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?
49
4. Will this project be in conflict with the goals or policies in any departmental master
plan?
5. List other city projects in the project area that are listed in a departmental master
plan or the CIP.
6. How will the project exceed city, state, or Federal standards and regulations (e.g.
environmental, health, safety, or transportation standards)?
Impact Assessment
1. LJsing the attached checklist, identify the potential short or long-term impacts of the
proposed project or (if applicable) the project alternatives.
50
City Of Boulder
Community and Environmental Assessment Process
-Checklist-
+ Positive effect
- Negative effect
0 Na effect
Pro~ect Title:
m
~
m
c
`w
*' N W
a „ ~,
9 > >
~ {~p N
C
~
w W W
a` ¢ ¢
A. Natural Areas or Features
Disturbance to species, communlties, habltat, or ecosystems due to
a. Constructlon activitles
2. Loss of mature trees or significant plants?
B. Riparlan Areas/Floodplatns
1. Encroachment upon the 100-yeer conveyance ore hlgh hezard flood zones?
2. Disturbance to or fragmentatlon of a riparlan corrldor4
1. Disturbance to or loss of a wetiand on site?
51
c Human or domestic animal encroachment
d. Chemicals (including petroleum products, fertilizers, pesticides,
herbicldes)
e. Behavioral displacement of wildlife species (due to noise from use
d. Chenges In soll or fill material on the site7
E. Water
2. Exposure of groundwater contamination from excavatlon or pumpingT
F. Air
1. Short or long term impacts to air quality (C02 emissions, pollutants)?
a. From mobile sources?
b From stationary sources?
G Resource Conservation
in water use?
2. Increases in energy use?
3. Generation of excess waste7
H. Culturel/Historic Resources
t.a. Impacts to a prehlstor(c or archaeological site7
b. Impacts to a building or structure over fifty years of age?
to a historic feature of the site?
d Impacts to significant agricultural land4
Visual
1. a. Effects on scenic vistas or public vlews7
b. Effects on the aesthetics of a site open to publlc viewT
c. Effects on views to unique geologic or physical features?
52
7. Impacts to water quality from any of the following?
a. Excavatlon
J. Safet
1. Health hazards, odors, or radon?
2. Site hazards?
K. Ph slolo icel Well-beln
1. Ex osure to excessive noise?
2. Excessive II ht or Iare7
3. Increase In vibrations7
L. Services
1 Additional need for•
a. Water or sanitar sewer servicesl
b. Storm sewer/Flood control features?
c. Maintenance of I es, culverts and manholes?
d. Police services?
e. Fire rotection servlces7
f. Recreation or arks facilitles7
. Librar services4
h. Trans ortatlon im rovements/traffic miH etlon?
I. Parkin 4
Affordable housin 4
k. O en s ace/urban o en Iand1
I. Power or ener use4
m. Telecommunications4
n. Health care/soclal services?
M. S ecial Po ulatlons
1. Etfects on:
53
a. Persons with disabilrties?
b. Senior o ulatlon?
c Children?
d. Restricted income ersons?
54
City of Boulder
Community and Environmental Assessment Process
ChecNllst Questlons
Note: The following questions are a supplement to the CEAP checklist. Only those questions
indicated on the checklest are to be answered in full.
A. Natural Areas and Features
Describe the potential for disturbance to or loss of sigmficant• species, plant
communities, wildlife habitats, or ecosystems via any of the activities listed below.
(Sigmficant species include any species listed or proposed to be listed as rare,
threatened or endangered on federal, state, county lists )
a. Construction achvrties
b Vegetahon removal
c. Human or domeshc arumal encroachment
d. Chemicals to be stored or used on the site (including petroleum products,
fertilizers, pesticides, herbicides)
e. Behavioral displacement of wildLfe species (due to noise from use activities)
f. Introduction of non-narive plant species in the site landscapmg
g. Changes to groundwater (mcluding installation of sump pumps) or surface runoff
(storm dramage, natural stream) on the site
h. Potential for discharge of sediment to any body of water either short term
(construction-related) or long term
i. Potential for wind erosion and transport of dust and sediment from the site
2. Describe the potential for disturbance to or loss of mature trees or significant plants.
If potential impacts have been identified, please provide any of the following
information that is relevant to the project:
A descriphon of how the proposed project would avoid, mirumize, or mttigate
identified impacts.
A habitat assessment of the site, mcluding: 1 a list of plant and animal species
and plant commumries of special concern found on the site; 2. a wildlife habitat
evaluation of the site.
55
• Maps of the site showing the locahon of any Boulder Valley Natural Ecosystem,
Boulder County Environmental Conservation Area, or critical wildhfe habitat
• A stormwater management plan consistent with state and local regulations. (A
state stormwater dischazge permit is required far city pro~ects which disturb more
than 1 acre of ground )
• Material Safety Data Sheets (MSDS) for chemicals to be used or stored on the
site.
B. Riparian Areas and Floodplains
1. Describe the extent to which the project will encroach upon the 100-year, conveyance
or high hazard flood zones.
2. Describe the extent to which the project will encroach upon, disturb, or fragment a
riparian corridor: (This mcludes impacts to the existmg channel of flow, streambanks,
ad~acent npanan zone extendmg 50 ft out from each bank, and any exishng natural
dramage from the s~te to a creek or stream.)
If potential impacts have been identified, please provide any of the Following
information that is relevant to the project:
A description of how the proposed pro~ect would avoid, nunimize, or nuhgate
identified impacts to habitat, vegetation, aquatic life, or water quality.
A map showing the location of any streams, ditches and other water bodies on or
neu the pro~ect site.
A map showing the location of the 100-year flood, conveyance, and high hazard
flood zones relative to the pro~ect site.
C. Wetlands
Describe any dtsturbance to or loss of a wetland on site that may result from the
project.
If potential impacts have been identiGed, please provide any of the following
information that is relevant to the project:
56
A description of how the proposed project would avoid, minimize, or mitigate
identified impacts
A map showing the location of any wetlands on or near the site. Identify both
those wetlands and buffer azeas which ue ~urisdictional under city code (on the
wetlands map in our ordinance) and other wetlands pursuant to federal criteria
(defiruhonal).
D. Geology and Soiis
1 Descnbe any.
a. impacts to umque geologic or physical features;
b geologic development constramts or effects to earth conditions or landslide,
erosion, or subsidence;
c substantial changes m topography, or
d changes in soil or fill material on the site.
that may result from the pro~ect.
If potential impacts have been identiC-ed, please provide the following:
A description of how the proposed pro~ect would avoid, mmimize, or mitigate
identified impacts.
A map showmg the location of any unique geologic or physical features, oi
hazardous soil or geologic condRions on the site.
E. Water Gluality
1. Describe any impacts to water quatity that may result from any of the followmg:
a. Excavatron that will be involved with the pro~ect
b. Changes in the amount of hardscape (paving, cement, brick, or buildmgs) in the
project area
c. Permanent changes m site ground features
d. Changes in the storm drainage from the site
e. Change m vegetation
f. Change in pedestrian and vehicle traffic
g. Temporary or permanent use or storage of pe[roleum products, fertilizers,
pesucides,or herbicides
57
2. Describe any pumping of groundwater that may be anticipated either durmg
construction or as a result of the pro~ect. If excavation or pumpmg is planned, what is
known about groundwater contamination in the surroundmg area (1/4 mile m all
direchons from the pro~ect) and the direction of groundwater flow?
If potential impacts have been identified, please provide any of the following that is
relevant to the project:
• A descnption of how the proposed pro~ect would avoid, mm~mize, or mitigate
impacts to water quality.
• Informahon from city water quality files and other sources on sites with soil and
groundwater impacts within U4 mile radius of pro~ect or site.
• If impacts to srte are possible, either from past activities at site or from adjacent sites,
perform a Phase I Environmental Impact Assessment pr~or to further design of the
pro~ect.
• Groundwater levels from borings or temporary peizometers prior to proposed
dewatermg or mstallation of dramage structures.
F. Air Quality
1. Describe potential short or long term impacts to air quality resulring from this project.
Distinguish between impacts from mobile sources (VMT/trips) and stationary sources
(APEN, HAPS).
G. Resource Conservation
1. Describe potentiai changes in water use that may result from the project
a Estimate the mdoor, outdoor (irrigation) and total daily water use for the facilrty.
b. Describe plans for minimizing water use on the site. (Xeriscape landscaping,
efficient irrigation system)
2. Describe potential mcreases m energy use that may result from the project
a. Describe plans for minimizmg energy use on the project or how energy
conservation measures will be incorporated into the buildmg design.
3. Describe the potential far excess waste generation resultmg from the project.
58
If potential impacts to waste generation have been identified, please describe plans
for recycling and waste minimization (deconstruction, reuse, recycling, green points).
H. Cultural/Historic Resources
1. Describe any impacts to•
a. a prehistoric or historic archaeological site;
b. a building or structure over fifty yeazs of age;
c. a historic feature of the s~te such as an irrigahon ditch; or
d. sigmficant agricultural lands
that may result from the pro~ect.
If potential impacts have been identified, please provide the Following:
• A description of how the proposed pro~ect would avoid, mmiiruze, or mrtigate
identified impacts.
Visual Quality
l. Describe any effects on
a scemc vistas or views open to the pubhc;
b. the aesthetics of a site open to public view; or
c. view corridors from the s~te to unique geologic or physical features
that may result from the project.
J. Safety
1. Describe any additional health hazards, odors, or exposure of people to radon that
may result from the project.
2. Describe any additional hazards that may result from the project. (Including risk of
explosion or the release of hazardous substances such as oil, pesticides, chemicals or
radiation)
59
If potential impacts have been identified, ptease provide the following:
• A description of how the proposed pro~ect would avoid, minimize, or mitigate
identified impacts during or after s~te construction through management of hazardous
materials or application of safety precautions.
K. Physiologicaf Well-being
1. Describe the potenhal for exposure of people to excess~ve noise caused by any phase
of the project
2. Descnbe any excessive light or glare that may result from the pro~ect.
3. Descr~be any mcrease in vibrations that may result from the pro~ect
If potential impacts have been identi~ed, please provide the following:
• A description of how the proposed pro~ect would avoid, mmimize, or mitigate
identified impacts.
L. Services
1. Descnbe any additional need for the followmg services as a result of the project•
a. Water or sanitary sewer services
b. Storxn sewer / Flood control features
c. Mamtenance of p~pes, culverts and manholes
d. Pohce services
e. Fire protection
f. Recreation or parks facilities
g. Libraries
h Transportation improvements/traffic mitigation
i. Pazking
j. Affordable housmg
k. Open space/urban open land
1. Power or energy use
m. Telecommunications
60
n. Health care/social services
2. Describe any impacts to any of the above exishng or planned city services or
department master plans as a result of this project (e g. budget, available parlang,
planned use of the site, public access, automobile/pedestrian conflicts, views)
M. Special Populations
1. Describe any effects the pro~ect may have on the following special populations:
a. Persons with disabilihes
b. Semor population
c Children
d. Restricted income persons
If potential impacts have been identi~ed, please provide the following:
A description of how the pioposed pro~ect would avoid, minimize, or mitigate
identified impacts.
61