Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout4 - Public hearing and final recommendations on the Boulder Feeder Canal Trail Community EnvironmenCITY OF BOULDER WATER RESOURCES ADVISORY BOARD REVIEW AGENDA ITEM MEETING DATE: October 17, 2005 AGENDA TITLE: Public hearing and consideration of a recommendation to the City Council on the Boulder Feeder Canal Trail Community and Environmenta] Assessment Process (CEAP) Report. REQUESTING DEPARTMENTS: Plannine & Development Services Peter Pollock, Planning Director Ruth McHeyser, Long Range Planning Manager Jean Gatza, Presenter Public Works / Utilities Ned Williams, Public Warks Director far Utilities Chris Rudkin, Water Quality/Environmental Services Coordinator Carol Ellinghouse, Water Resources Coordinator EXECUTIVE SUMMARY: The purpose of this item is far the reviewing advisory board to make a recommendation to the City Council on the Boulder Feeder Canal Trail Community and Environmental Assessment Process (CEAP). A joint city and county interdepartmental staff team has completed the Boulder Feeder Canal Trail Community and Environmental Assessment Frocess (CEAP) Report which examines the city of Boulder and Boulder County's proposal to construct an 11.5 mile trail along the Boulder Feeder Canal. The purpose of the CEAP process is to assess potential impacts of a public project at the conceptual level and to identify mitigation measures to address potential impacts. The primary issue addressed in this CEAP is the potential impacts of the proposed trail on the city's drinking water supply and the ability to mitigate those impacts. Other community and environmental impacts are addressed as well. The CEAP report is included in Attachment A. Three alternatives were considered providing a range of approaches for how to proceed with trai] development and mitigation measures aimed at addressing potential impacts of the trail. The alternatives are outlined in the Analysis section below. The staff team recommends Alternative C- Proceed with trail development in the neaz term and include mitiga[ion measures to reduce existing contaminants and prevent future impacts to the water AGENDA ITEM # Pa e 1 supply. This alternative includes additional mitigation to address the potential impacts of leashed dogs and horses. Recommended mitigation measures include: • Modifications to trail design to include limited fencing, redirection of drainage away from the canal, and separation of the trail from the canal where feasible; • Sanitary facilities, trash facilities and educational information provided at trailheads; • Improved water quality monitoring and cooperative management of water-contamination response; and • Modification of water source selection at Boulder Reservoir Water Treatment Plant to draw water primarily from the Boulder Reservoir Basin instead of directly from the Boulder Feeder Canal. Addressing existing sources of pollution either prior to or in conjunction with trail construction is also recommended. Long term plans to pursue construction of a pipeline will receive further consideration. Staff requests that the Water Resources Advisory Board (WRAB), Parks and Recreation Advisory Boazd (PRAB), Open Space Boazd of Trustees (OSBT) and Boulder County's Park and Open Space Advisory Board review and consider the attached report and make a recommendation to the Boulder City Council and Board of Boulder County Commissioners. The City Council and Board of County Commissioners will consider approval of the CEAP. Fiscal Impacts: Total trail construction, management and maintenance costs have yet to be determined. A detailed breakdown of cost estimates for recommended mitigation measures to address water quality impacts is included in Section III of the CEAP report. Costs for trail construction, facilities, management and maintenance will be further defined as detailed trail design proceeds. Approximately one mile of the proposed trail will be constructed, managed and maintained by the city of Boulder Open Space and Mountain Parks Department (OSMP). All construction costs associated with this portion of the trail will be funded by OSMP. Other city and county costs for on- going management and maintenance will be incurred once the trail is constructed. The remaining 10.5 miles of trail will be constructed, managed and maintained by Boulder County. It is expected that trail construction of this portion of the trail will be funded primarily by the 2001 Countywide Transportation Improvement sales tax revenues for regional trail development. The county may seek funding from additional sources including Colorado Lottery Great Outdoors Colorado funds. Impacts: The primary impacts of this project are outlined in the Boulder Feeder Canal Trail CEAP Report. Section III provides a detailed discussion on the impacts to drinking water and outlines the recommended mitigation measures. Section N provides information regarding other impacts of the trail including: habitat, wetlands, user safety, and the need for additional services or facilities. Other Board and Commission Feedback: The following advisory boazds will review the LEAP report and make recommendations to the City Council and County Commissioners: Water Resources Advisory Board (city) Oct. 17, 2005 Parks and Recreation Advisory Board (city) Oct. 24, 2005 AGENDA ITEM # Pa e 2 Parks and Open Space Advisory Board (county) Oct. 27, 2005 Open Space Board of Trustees (city) Nov. 9, 2005 Public Feedback: A public open house was held on Oct. 6, 2005 to gather input on the CEAP report and staff recommendations. Approximately 40 people attended the open house. Many of the attendees were adjacent or nearby property owners; some were interested potential trail users. Many of the people with property adjacent to the canal had questions and comments about the impacts of a trail to their property and neighborhood. Comments included: concern about where trailheads, parking areas and facilities would be located; impacts to livestock; increased human and anima] presence; and losing the rural nature of the neighborhood. Messages were also received via email from members of the public who did not attend the open house. All the comments received are included in Attachment B. Staff Recommendation: The staff team recommends proceeding with trail development in the near term with the mitigation measures outlined in Alternative C. The staff chose this alternative because it presents a comprehensive series of mitigation measures to address impacts to the drinking water supply so that the trail will not need to include restrictions to access for those with dogs or horses. The recommended mitigation measures include: • Modifications to trail design to include limited fencing, redirection of drainage away from the canal, and separation of the trail from the canal where feasible; • Sanitary facilities, trash facilities and educational information provided at trailheads; • Improved water quality monitoring and cooperative management of water-contamination response; and • Modification of water source selection at Boulder Reservoir Water Treatment Plant to draw water primarily from the Boulder Reservoir Basin instead of directly from the Boulder Feeder Canal. Addressing existing sources of contamination into the canal is essential. Ongoing monitoring of water quality will also be an important component to detect potential contamination of drinking water and help assure that additional protection measures can be implemented if necessary. A more detailed description of the recommended mitigation is available in the LEAP Report. Analysis: The analysis completed to date is outlined in the Boulder Feeder Canal Trail Report. Section I outlines the background, purpose and need for the trail, the primary alternatives that were considered and the rationale for the recommended altemative. Section II outlines the goals assessment of the CEAP as well as potential trade-offs considered as part of proceeding with trail construction. Sections III provides a discussion on the impacts to drinking water and outlines the recommended mitigation measures in detail. Section IV provides information regarding other impacts of the trail including: habitat, wetlands, user safety, and the need for additional services or facilities. Staff considered three alternatives providing a range of mitigation measures aimed at addressing potential impacts of the trail on the drinking water supply. They are: AGENDA ITEM # Pa e 3 Alternative A -Delay trail development until changes to water quality or additional treatment facilities are implemented. Construction of the pipeline or other additional filtration systems would need to be employed to address the increased contamination that would occur due to trail use. If the pipeline is approved and funding secured, construction is not likely until 2010. Alternative B -Proceed with trail development in the near term, include mitigation measures to reduce existing contaminants and restrict some uses to prevent potential impacts to the water supply. Restrictions would prohibit trail visitors with dogs or horses from using the Boulder Feeder Canal Trail. Long term plans to pursue construction of a pipeline would receive further consideration. Alternative C -Proceed with trail development in the near term and include mitigation measures to reduce existing contaminants and prevent future impacts to the water supply. This alternative includes additional mitigation to address the potential impacts of leashed dogs and horses. Long term plans to pursue construction of a pipeline would receive further consideration. Two reports were commissioned from consultants for analysis of the potential impacts of the Boulder Feeder Canal Trail. In 2002, an Environmental Resource Inventory and Report was completed. This report informed the analysis and recommendations in the CEAP report regarding environmental impacts and mitigation. In 2005, a Health and Safety Analysis was completed to assess the impacts of the trail on drinking water and trail visitor safety. This report is included as Attachment B to the CEAP report. Next Steps: If the recommendations in the CEAP are approved by both the city and the county, staff will proceed with the next steps to develop this trail. The Boulder Feeder Canal is managed by the Northern Colorado Water Conservancy District (NCWCD) under an agreement with the U.S. Bureau of Reclamation who owns most of the land. Boulder County, with cooperation from city of Boulder's OSMP, will prepare a more detailed trail design and management plan and submit this proposal to the Bureau of Reclamation for approval. Through the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) federal review process, it is likely that an Environmental Assessment (EA) will need to be prepared for consideration of the impacts of the trail. The EA process would include multiple public meetings and opportunities for public input. Final approval would need to be granted from the Bureau of Reclamation with input from the NCWCD Board of Directors. ATTACHMENTS: Attachment A: Boulder Feeder Cana] Trail CEAP Report (sent to WRAB on Sept. 30, 2005) Attachment B: Public Input AGENDA ITEM # ~ Paee 4 Oct 3, 2005 Planning Department; Water Resources Advisory Board, Pazk & Recreation and Pazks & Open Space Advisory Boards; Open Space Board of Trustees; Boulder City Council; Boulder County Commissioners c/o Jean Gatza Planning Department City of Boulder Suzy and I own property just north of Nelson road bordering the NCWCD canal, where we raise Highland cattle. Our neighbor on the west side of the canal, Larry Streazs, raises buffalo. Previously we attended a meeting in Niwot regarding Boulder County's proposal to open the canal to a public trail system. We aze opposed to this for the following reasons. From a purely selfish standpoint, we would rather not have the public trailing through our back pastures. Practically, the few trespassers that do frequent the canal road often do cause problems with our live-stock. Usually these are associated with dogs that leave the trail to venture into the pasture with the cows with calves. Sometimes it's the people. The problem is even more pronounced with Larry's buffalo which are far more sensitive to human intrusion. Last yeaz a birthing mama was spooked by someone on the canal causing her to drag her half-born calf to death. In previous years Suzy and I spent part of a day trying to roundup and re-contain the entire buffalo herd after being spooked by inquisitive public along the canal. Larry tells stories of a trespasser who actually climbed the fence for pictures among the buffalo, then hid from him by laying in an irrigation ditch. The general area surrounding us to the north of Nelson Rd. is a recognized ripazian area where many birds of prey nest and hunt. Introduction of a public trail directly through this area will certainly disrupt this very necessary ecosystem. The county argues that it would be better to have the County Open Space officers patrol the canal to solve the existing trespass problem. They say that the public uses the canal road now illegally, and they argue that making it legal would allow them to control such use. I suggest otherwise. While cutting hay during the warm summer days, I see no more than a couple of people trespassing on the canal. There aze probably a couple more that I miss, but far less than the one-per-hour that the county estimates as current illegal usage. If it opens to the public, the County estimates 60 people per hour, i.e. one per minute! We frequently read in the newspaper of the complications Open Space has with the public on its existing mountain trail system which crosses their own land with plenty of lateral room to avoid conflicts. Should we really believe that they will effectively control a 15 ft. wide canal trail that crosses private land. If current illegal usage is the issue, wouldn't pressure on the sheriff to patrol the canal road as a safety issue be productive. NCWCD has mandated that the trail will pass on the west side of the canal opposite the existing dirt road. Can you imagine a combination of bikers, horsemen, and pedestrians with multiply dogs all meeting on a trail that's about 15 ft. wide that is bordered on one side by extremely cold water with slippery banks and private bazbed wire fence on the other. Once the multitudes discover this trail and the associated conflicts, I suspect that many of the bikers and horsemen will simply move to the graveled east side to avoid congestion, and NCWCD will have a worse enforcement problem and conflict with its maintenance vehicles. And Open Space will simply point to budget limitations to justify the inadequacy of the patrol officers. The experience of falling into the canal is not pleasant and quite hazardous due to the extremely cold water and exceptionally slippery clay banks. There have been several incidents of local dogs dying of hypothermia in the canal, including one of our Highland cows years ago. Larry tells of a terrible experience trying to vacate its grasp after slipping in. And the underground siphons marked "certain death" are not survivable for man or beast. The County has indicated that the private landowners owning fee interest in land along the canal are in favor of this trail. I've not talked to one yet who is. A neighbor of mine owning such interest is unequivocally opposed. And I suspect any rancher along the canal feels similarly. The people of the City of Boulder seem to believe that they can simply take what they want from private interests in the name of public good. We farmers disagree with the concept wholly. The NCWCD ditch, as an integral part of the farming and domestic water delivery function, should not add to the damage and encroachment that the public brings to private lands. There are several other reasons to disallow this trail such as water impurity issues, parking and traffic issues, increased vandalism of private property, etc. But this appeal is from a current rancher who knows the problems that the public brings to farm and ranch lands. Please remember these thoughts when considering the proposed trail. Very truly yours, Gary and Suzy Rubin (Jean, would you please see that the addressees get copies of this correspondence.) October 6, 2005 Jean Gatza Tim Swope City of Boulder 1739 Broadway Boulder, CO 80302 Via: Hand Delivery & Email Re: Boulder Feeder Canal Trail Dear Jean & Tim: We have reviewed the public information on the Boulder Feeder Canal Trail proposal and have numerous concerns. Locating the trail on the west side of the Feeder Canal just north of Niwot Road will result in the alignment of the trail along our northeast property boundary for several hundred feet. We strongly object to this trail alignment because of the increased human and animal presence. Besides the visual intrusion, there will be an increased human and animal presence from very early in the morning until late after dazk. There will be an increase in noise and the trail has the potential to be degraded with trash and animal waste. Aligning the trail on the Feeder Canal maintenance road or east of the maintenance road would be a faz more preferable alignment. This alignment has the advantage of eliminating a bridge crossing of the canal which converges with the Feeder Canal. A pedestrian bridge to cross this canal would be very expensive to construct and maintain. We believe that the City should spend tax dollars wisely. We also oppose construction of a [railhead on Niwot Road near 55`s Street. A [railhead at this location will negatively impact the quality of life in our quiet country neighborhood. There will be an increase in automobile traffic and an increase in human and animal presence, which will generate noise from very early in the morning until after dark. Our neighborhood will potentially be degraded by trash and animal waste, and we will likely have people parking along the road which will create safety issues. Finally, we believe your selection of alternative C, which allows dogs and horses, fails to adequately address the serious issue of contamination of the water in the canal and Boulder Reservoir. We will contact you in the near future to provide further information on our concerns. Sincerely, David Johnson Bill Carlton 5415 Niwot Road Longmont, CO 80503 303-516-1616 Emails Received Regarding the Boulder Feeder Canal Trail CEAP 8/2/2005 I am Richazd Carlson. I own the property on the north west corner of Niwot road at 55th. My property is Lotl, Lot 3 and outlot A of DODD N.U.P.U.D. The only picture in the CEAP report is the back of my house and the low-water crossing that is on my outlot. Jean, we met at the public meeting at the grange hall last summer. I had been talking to Scott Robson with the county up to that time. I cannot seem to contact Scott at the county anymore. He must of moved on. I copied Tim Swope on this note. I got his information for the report. I read the draft of the CEAP report on the feeder trail. It looks very complete; people not aware of the project would get an great overview from the report. Scott visited my property last yeaz and we discussed a few things I would like to bring to your attention. I bought these issues up at the Grange meeting also. They were recorded on the poster paper. We were concerned with noise, trash, rest room location smell and traffic. The report addressed these concerns well. We discussed that the existing ditch road should be used from Niwot Road to Left Hand Creek instead of the other side. This is due to the intersection of the diversion canal from Left Hand Creek to the Boulder feeder, the high-capacity siphon and Left Hand Creek itself. This way the trail would cross only Left Hand Creek, not the other ditches. It would allow for a much simpler bridge or whatever crossing is used. There is a lot of room north of Left Hand to continue the trail on the other side of the ditch from the road through our outlot. I know that this is the route the ditch company would like. We would like this configuration to be the case. It has the added benefit, to us, of keeping the traffic away from directly behind our house. We were concerned about the parking in front of our house. Scott thought that it could get posted "no pazking". I saw that a proposed trail head at 55th and Niwot could be part of the plan. I was not aware of this. The trail head should help, but we would like the street posted. Please feel free to contact me a[ any time if you would like to discuss any of this. I do plan to attend the next public meeting scheduled for sometime this month per the web site. I assume a notice will be sent out. Good luck on this project. It appears to be important to the area Richard Cazlson 9/27/05 I will be out of town on a business trip and unable to attend the Oct meeting. I strongly urge you to NOT allow dogs (either on or off leash) to use the Feeder Canal Trail, given the potential impact of their urine and feces on the water supply. I strongly endorse the exclusion of dogs, horses, and other pets or work animals (llamas, mules, etc) from the trail. The reducing the quality of our drinking water with their feces must not be allowed. Karen S. Hollweg 4440 Greenbriaz Blvd Boulder, CO 80305 303-494-2016 9/30/2005 I am unable to attend the planned October 6th meeting at the Altona Grange, but would like to express my strong support for equine access to any and all trails created. Thank you for your attention to this matter. Anne 10/1/2005 My name is Mark Schroeder and I live at 5890 Prospect Rd. I am writing about the proposed Boulder Feeder Canal. My wife, Cazla, and I are quite concerned about the potential development. We currently live about 50 feet from the canal. At the present moment, as you know, the canal is used by hikers, bikers, and runners. We applaud that use, but must point out that dogs (sometimes aggressive) often come into our yazd, defecate on our premise, and chase our livestock. The proposed canal development will only add to that. And in particular we aze concemed about litigation. What happens if one of our horses kicks a stray dog and kills it? Clearly the trail states that dogs must be leashed, but I highly doubt that will be the case. What happens if a dog runs into our organic garden and teazs it up? More important for us, however, is that we and our neighbors, some of whom have lived quite a long time in this area, value our rural lifestyle. We are concerned about where you aze positioning trailheads and parking lots, In addition, what happens to our lovely little road when a hundred people are parking on it on weekends like they do on Lefthand? Finally, what happens when an accident occurs when someone is crossing a road? I am an azdent advocate of open space, but this seems like a project conceived without input from the people who live on the trail. Looking forward to hearing from you. Thank you, Mazk Schroeder 10/4/2005 Being a 20 year unincorporated Boulder County resident, an Open Space and Trails Supporter, a past member of the Boulder County Parks and Open Space Advisory Committe (POSAC), a past president of the Boulder County Horse Association (BCHA), and an unauthorized user of the canal's long existing trail feature --- I have long advocated, and promoted at various opportunities, a Boulder Feeder Canal Trail. I am pleased with the draft "CEAP", especally for its recognition of equestrian use. It's a positive, upbeat, supportive, CAN DO document. The "CEAP" along with the "Health and Safety Analysis" provide a good overview of the water quality issue, the personal safety concerns, associated mitigation measures, and the complexity of the project. I'm inclined towazd keeping dogs, horses, and people from having easy access to the canal ANYWHERE along the route. That means extensive restrictive fencing. I'm inclined to keep destination attractor trailheads TO A MINIMUM. North and South terminus. The trail is a link (not one long pazk) between Lyons and Boulder destinations. Along the way should be LOCAL section utilization "walk or ride-on acsesses". Basically as it is today. At this time the details aze in the details yet to come. I support this CEAP and the overall objective. It's important that the players, (City, County, NCWD, Land Owners), who have a role in making this happen find common ground on which to agreeably move forwazd. Forward to establish a Vail link that I'm sure will be pointed to as a model for what multiple agencies and cooperative landowners can accomplish. Creighton Stewart 10775 N. 65th St. Longmont, CO. 80503 Phone: 303 776-9568 10/6/2005 Below are my brief comments on the draft LEAP report on the Boulder Feeder Canal Trail: > prohibit animal access to limit pathogens > minimize parking to lower the impact > i don't believe more access will increase dumping. people drive cars [o dump > i don't believe more access will increase vandalism, since the existing intersections today provide plenty of opportunity for that now. > if water treatment is a lazge issue, stop access to boulder reservoir > use existing trail to reduce costs > safety doesn't seem to be a concern neaz other waterways (cottonwood, community ditch, boulder creek...) and certainly other trails are more dangerous. > 21 toilets seems excessive considering most open space [rails have 1 at the [railhead, if any. > if there is a summer closure make it only a trial. i personally would most value this trail in the winter time when other trails are snowed in. thank for the opportunity for input! alexey davies 10/7/2005 I'm sorry I am a bit late to the game in sending you my comment on the opening of this trail, but I would like to add my voice to the numbers who FAVOR the opening of this trail. As a mountain biker, I try to not ride my mountain bike on the pavement...I have a road bike for that. This trail would be a great flatland route to go to the Lyons area and connect with their trails, or to get off half way and head up to Heil Ranch. I have heard for years that this was to be open to hikers, runners and bikers...I have often seen all three user groups represented on the trail, yet the trail remains "officially closed" It seems this is the case of some organizations going out of its way to be overly protective...I have heard one reason the trail remains closed is the fear of law suits in the event someone was dumb enough to jump into the ditch. I know we live in an era of lawsuits, but I hope this is not the stumbling block that is holding up the opening of the trail. Other reasons I have heard all seem to deal with water quality...In other words there is some fear of people peeing into the ditch, or throwing trash on the trail, or some such undesirable outcome of human interaction with the land. There is no doubt that human traffic will cause some negative impacts...but I submit that these will be very minor. This trail, while longer, is similar to Dowdy Draw in Eldorado Springs. It gets a lot of traffic, and I would have to say the only real negative impact there is caused by cows. I find the water quality issue rather interesting, as this ditch feeds the Boulder Reservoir...a body of water used for recreation first...then City of Boulder Water as a last resort. The amount of gas, oil, dog and human waste that gets put directly into that body of water would seem to be a far greater concern than the minor level of pollution that would be added by allowing human traffic on the ditch trail... With the red herring of pollution taken out of the argument for keeping the trail closed... lets be reasonable and make the decision to open the trail as the benefits far out way the negatives of doing so. Benefits: Decrease the need for automobile traffic to Lyons to ride the trails in that area (Rabbit Mountain, Hall Ranch and Heil Ranch) Decrease the bike traffic on US 36 from Boulder to Lyons, as some fat tired peddlers would prefer to ride the ditch trail Increase the overall use of the trails network in Boulder county, (this promotes healthier citizens, and again gets people out of their cars) Provide a vital off-road, north-south corridor for winter riding, running etc. Thanks for taking these comments... Hope to see you on the trail one day. Michael C. Deragisch Assistant Director for Employer Relations Phone: 303-492-4123 Fax: 303-492-5723 Career Services UCB 133 Boulder, CO 80309 Boulder Feeder Canal Trail Community and Environmental Assessment Process (LEAP) Open House -October 6, 2005 PLEASE PROVIDE COMMENTS IN THE BOX BELOW (continue on back if needed): Comments• ~OU\ ('L 1\\L.P "fib s~p no'l`~ ~~S ~ ~~1~ `y ~L1 Y 1 ~l~'P l l7l)~'f'Z ( ~ 1 'Y ~S1 n c ~ ~Vn E ~'N 1 ~ ~ 1 `\ ~~ jj {mi (~ - ~r ('~T ~\IlD ~I 1 LVl VLQC~~ ~L ~ ~ ~ ~ r t~ , ~,~W 'K-l/S ~V _` / ~. ~ ~.. UI ` V~~I ~\~X ~Q~s stn ~ alnc~ wC~1c9 lie Pa q~ car ~o , C ., '~' ~ ~c~~P/ c'1 l ~ ~~ ,~t~l n ~~a1~r c~~ ~St~c~ ~ c~t-,~ (' Q G~~~~~~ tC~/~ ~Y'T f i°j(I i1~1~ ~~ 'I~ ~?r2~ ~ I ~r ~ t C ~~- X11 ~ rt Ll c'~ t .J ~1 c~l~ ~ ~ Y~ c~ ~ C.t S ~1~ _ CC, X~ ~ ~ ~ ne~ /~(•~P~t nl~y ' Y' 1 ~ ~ ~ ~ v ` ~ 1./ y1 CQ ~~ h ~ 11 cl n~ k-Y~ 1 Name L~~~ ~A(~.~ Street Address, Zip ~~a+a_~~~_~~~ __ ~~~-t-1 p~ ~'~`~ E-mail YlP1~r~~ C~cX~G~\thK. Yom- tJ6u1ckS1..1 L(7 ~~ ~ O ~.~ You may send your comments by fax (303) 441-3241, or by mail to the City of Boulder -Boulder Feeder Canal Trail CEAP, Attn. Jean Gatza, 1739 Broadway, third floor, P.O. Box 791, Boulder, CO 80306. Additional Information: http://www.ci.boulder.co.us/buildingservices/long_range/Bldr_Fdr_Canal.htm or call (303) 441-4907. Boulder Feeder Canal Trail Community and Environmental Assessment Process (LEAP) Open House -October 6, 2005 PLEASE PROVIDE COMMENTS IN THE BOX BELOW (continue on back if needed): f nmmantc• --_~ ---- ~ ~ d- _ 0 --h2 ~. 0 ~' ,' ~ Gle n ~ C.< < aX .L C ~ ~ SU Name (~_ Street Address, Zip S ~ lam/ tCt~ D~ E-mail ~~. ~- You may send your comments by fax (303) 441-3241, or by mail to the City of Boulder -Boulder Feeder Canal Trail CEAP, Attn. Jean Gatza, 1739 Broadway, third floor, P.O. Box 791, Boulder, CO 80306. Additional Information: http://www.ci.boulder.co.us/buildingservices/long_rangeBldr_Fdr_Canal.htm or call (303) 441-4907. Boulder Feeder Canal Trail Community and Environmental Assessment Process (CEAP) Open House -October 6, 2005 PLEASE PROVIDE COMMENTS IN THE BOX BELOW (continue on back if needed): rhMll~Pt1 ~C• • ~~ / rl ~1 A/w• ~ i gat - I~w~ a ~ ~. THAI e Tw. w t L- a~. ~ V~ ~. ~ ~. Name ~' ~~ • Street Address, Zip .Z »a ~~e ~~~ •~~ E-mail a ~ ~ N Z ~ • «~ w ~~ MrNf• ` 0 ~~ ~~ y You may send your comments by fax (303) 441-3241, or by mail to the City ofBoulder -Boulder Feeder Canal Trail CEAP, Attn. Jean Gatza, 1739 Broadway, third floor, P.O. Box 791, Boulder, CO 80306. Additional Information: http://www.ci.boulder.co.us/buildingservices/long_range/Bldr_Fdr_Canal.htm or call (303) 441-4907. 7 ~~ s.i4 s~t~ 'e1tM'~11'1 ti. ,~ w~~~ a~ Boulder Feeder Canal Trail Community and Environmental Assessment Process (CEAP) Open House -October 6, 2005 PLEASE PROVIDE COMMENTS IN THE BOX BELOW (continue on back if needed): Name Street Address, Zip ~ ~ ya ~r ~ f ~ (~ E-mail ry ~. Goers ~s-' ~ Nrr L~A/s~ ~~Se S You may send your comments by fax (303) 441-3241, or by mail to the City of Boulder -Boulder Feeder Canal Trail CEAP, Attn. Jean Gatza, 1739 Broadway, third floor, P.O. Box 791, Boulder, CO 80306. Additional Information: http://www.ci.boulder.co.us/boildingservices/long_range/Bldr_Fdr_Canal.htm or call (303) 441-4907. '~ ~. Boulder Feeder Canal Trail Community and Environmental Assessment Process (CEAP) Open House -October 6, 2005 PLEASE PROVIDE COMMENTS IN THE BOX BELOW (continue on back if needed): You may send your comments by fax (303) 441-3241, or by mail to the City of Boulder -Boulder Feeder Canal Trail CEAP, Attn. Jean Gatza, 1739 Broadway, third floor, P.O. Box 791, Boulder, CO 80306. Additional Information: http://www.ci.boulder.co.us/buildingservices/long_range/Bldr_Fdr_Canal.htm or call (303) 441-4907. Name ~_f~,r~~~ Street Address, Zip l~D ~on ly% ~/y~;Fnr ~ ~ ~~3~ E-mail honbl,n-i ~.ooo~ ./,chaa,co.7-z ~, ~ ~,~i -~Gv ~ .4J~ A`~ ~i>T O ~ .Vf2/Yt~ /J'1 .NW' Tl (/Y4WK/ / l67 ~~~ I ' ' .~ - - c