Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutCOUNCIL - AGENDA ITEM - 12/16/2008 - RESOLUTION 2008-132 DOCUMENTING CITY COUNCILS COMM ITEM NUMBER: 27 AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY DATE: December 16, 2008 FORT COLLINS CITY COUNCIL STAFF: Kathleen Bracke Mark Jackson SUBJECT Resolution 2008-132 Documenting City Council's Comments on the North I-25 Draft Environmental Impact Statement. RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends adoption of the Resolution. FINANCIAL IMPACT Adoption of this Resolution does not create a financial impact for the City. The North I-25 DEIS document includes mention of various funding options and strategies for funding the future implementation of the various recommended improvements. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The Colorado Department of Transportation (CDOT) is conducting the North I-25 Environmental Impact Statement for the Interstate 25 corridor from Northern Colorado to the Denver Metropolitan area.CDOT released the draft North I-25 EIS(DEIS)document for public comment on October 31, 2008 for a 60-day review period. Public comments can be submitted to CDOT on the DEIS through December 30, 2008. City staff from multiple departments has reviewed the DEIS document and provides the enclosed comments. Staff is requesting comments from City Council on December 16th to share with CDOT as part of the formal comment process on the DEIS. City staff will continue to work with CDOT during 2009 to provide additional input and comments as part of Final EIS document process. In addition,City staff will conduct thorough outreach to City Boards and Commissions in early 2009 to gather additional input and comments from the Fort Collins community representatives. This on-going information and input from staff, City Boards, Commissions, and Council will be forwarded to CDOT as part of the City of Fort Collins' overall comments on the North I-25 EIS document, including recommendations for preferred improvements. Staff is not asking City Council to make a formal recommendation for a preferred alternative at this time. Once staff has received input from the City Boards and Commission,they will bring this item back to City Council in early 2009 for a formal action on the preferred alternative. There will be December 16, 2008 -2- Item No. 27 another round of formal comment period for the Final EIS document, which is anticipated to be released by CDOT in mid-2009. BACKGROUND The Colorado Department of Transportation(CDOT), Federal Highway Administration(FHWA), and the Federal Transit Administration (FTA) has commissioned the North I-25 Environmental Impact Statement (EIS). The regional study area extends from Wellington at the north end to Denver Union Station on the south, and from US 287 and the Burlington Northern and Santa Fe (BNSF)Railway routes on the west to US 85 and the Union Pacific Railroad(UPRR)routes on the east. The regional study area spans portions of seven counties: Adams, Boulder, Broomfield, Denver, Jefferson, Larimer, and Weld. The regional study area includes 38 incorporated communities and three transportation planning regions (TPRs): the Denver Regional Council of Governments(DRCOG),the North Front Range Metropolitan Planning Organization(NFRMPO), and the Upper Front Range Regional Planning Commission(UFRRPC). Major population centers in the regional study area include Fort Collins, Greeley, Loveland, and the communities in the northern portion of the Denver metropolitan area(Denver Metro Area). Please see Attachment 1 for a map of the study area. The map of the study area is enclosed as part of the Executive Summary document. The purpose of CDOT's North I-25 Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) is to identify the type of facility improvements that will meet long-term travel needs between the Denver Metro Area and the rapidly growing population centers along the I-25 corridor north to the Fort Collins-Wellington area. To meet long-term travel needs,the project must improve safety, mobility and accessibility, and provide modal alternatives and interrelationships. The need for the project is driven by the following four categories: • Increased frequency and severity of crashes • Increasing traffic congestion leading to mobility and accessibility problems • Aging and functionally obsolete infrastructure • Lack of modal alternatives The project needs relate differently to highway and transit components of the solutions. Highway alternatives were evaluated in addressing all four of these needs. Transit alternatives were evaluated in addressing two of the needs: increasing traffic congestion leading to mobility and accessibility problems,and lack of modal alternatives. Specific measures were developed for each of the needs in order to provide a means for evaluating the effectiveness of each alternative. The alternative packages that address these stated needs are included in the"North I-25 EIS Executive Summary" document(Attachment 1). CDOT has involved many cities,counties,and other agencies that are stakeholders within the North I-25 EIS study area. Since CDOT began the North I-25 EIS process, City Transportation staff has participated on the "Technical Advisory Committee" and City Council representatives have participated on the "Regional Elected Officials Advisory Committee". CDOT staff and their consultant team also held many public open house and meetings over the last several years of the EIS process. December 16, 2008 -3- Item No. 27 CDOT staff will be submitting summary information from the last round of public meetings on the Draft EIS (DEIS) document prior to the City Council meeting on December 16th and they will be available to give Council a presentation highlighting the DEIS document and next steps. CDOT's website for the DEIS is:http://www.dot.state.co.us/NorthI25eis/deis.cfm.A hard copy of the North I-25 DEIS document has also been on display for public review during the public comment period. Summary of Staff Comments Overall,CDOT's DEIS document is very thorough and adequately addresses the purpose and needs identified during the scoping phase of the EIS process. The EIS determines the direction for the future of transportation improvements for Northern Colorado. Attached is a summary of staff comments from multiple City departments on the DEIS document and proposed packages of highway and transit improvements(Attachment 2). Please note that these are high level,summary comments and not intended to serve as a detailed overview of the I-25 EIS. Staff comments address the pros and cons of each of the proposed CDOT packages and comments include how well each of the packages compare with the City's adopted Master Plans and policy documents. The City departments that have provided comments on the DEIS document include: • Transportation • Natural Resources • Parks and Recreation • Historic Preservation • Regulatory and Government Affairs Division. CDOT's DEIS document includes two packages of alternatives. Package "A" includes adding general purpose lanes and interchange improvements along I-25 from Mulberry/SH 14 south to the Denver Metro Area to increase traffic capacity and improve safety. To address transit needs, Package A includes adding regional commuter rail service along the existing Burlington Northern Santa Fe railroad corridor from Downtown Fort Collins to Longmont to connect with Denver's new FasTracks commuter rail system as well as regional bus transit service between Fort Collins and Windsor/Greeley. The regional commuter rail stations in Fort Collins would be located at the Downtown Transit Center, Colorado State University, and the City's future South Transit Center. The regional bus service would connect to the City's existing and/or future transit stops along Harmony Road. Package `B" includes adding "High Occupancy/Tolled Express Lanes" (HO/T or TEL) along the center of I-25 from Harmony Road south to the Denver Metro Area. These HOT lanes are designed to improve travel time for carpools, vanpools, and transit service as well as employ the use of congestion pricing,allowing people in single occupant vehicles to choose to pay the toll to drive in the less congested lanes.Package B includes the same interchange improvements shown in Package A. The transit improvements shown in Package B include regional Bus Rapid Transit service beginning at the City's future South Transit Center and traveling east via Harmony Road to I-25, and then using the HO/T lanes to travel along the center of I-25 to downtown Denver. Regional BRT stations in Fort Collins would be located at the South Transit Center,intersection of Harmony and Timberline roads, and at the Harmony and I-25 Transportation Transfer Center (park& ride). Transportation Planning December 16, 2008 -4- Item No. 27 From a transportation perspective, there are many advantages of the proposed highway and interchange improvements shown in the North I-25 DEIS to address traffic safety and capacity needs both for existing conditions and for the long-range future. Package A's general purpose lanes offer the most flexibility for addressing future traffic capacity needs for all vehicle types (passenger cars, trucks, etc.), however Package B's High Occupancy/Tolled Express Lanes support the use of carpooling,vanpooling,transit,and congestion pricing opportunities. Regarding future transit improvements,the regional commuter rail transit system shown along the existing BNSF railroad tracks in Package A more effectively addresses community transit access due to the proximity of proposed rail service to the existing Fort Collins' population centers and major activity centers such as Downtown and CSU. However, the regional Bus Rapid Transit service shown in Package B is also workable due to the link it will provide to the City's existing and future local transit system along Harmony Road and at the City's future South Transit Center. Both the regional Commuter Rail and Bus Rapid Transit alternatives will greatly improve Fort Collins' access via transit to the neighboring Front Range cities as well as to the Denver Metro Area. Given the strong inter-relationship of land use and transportation planning, Transportation staff is requesting that additional travel demand forecast modeling be completed by CDOT as part of the determination of a preferred alternative. This updated modeling analysis should factor in updated land use data to reflect the various land use patterns,and changes in land use,that are expected along each of the corridors based on the proposed transportation improvements shown in each package of alternatives. All of the proposed improvements (highway and transit) come at a steep price tag and CDOT, FHWA,and FTA will need to work collaboratively with all of the North Front Range communities, counties, and metropolitan planning organizations to strategize workable financing options for any of these proposed future regional transportation infrastructure improvements. Natural Resources Natural Resources supports efforts to enhance multi-modal travel systems and supports the Transportation Planning staff s I-25 comments. In terms of impacts to Natural Areas,the most troubling issue noted is the possibility of a chain link fence installation along the commuter rail through Natural Areas in the southwest portion of Fort Collins. The fence would be highly disruptive to wildlife movement. CDOT needs to update its EIS maps to accurately reflect the size and location of the City of Fort Collins' Natural Areas and Parks. Also,there is concern regarding impacts to large trees, riparian habitat, and other wildlife areas and corridors. Another area of concern is noise impacts to open space areas and note that any efforts to mitigate road noise (barriers) should consider wildlife movement(deer,antelope)and create wildlife crossings across I-25 especially north of Fort Collins and including the Wellington area. Any barriers within the more "metro" area should provide occasional openings to permit the movement of wildlife across the interstate. December 16, 2008 -5- Item No. 27 Water quality is another important area of concern in terms of increases to stormwater contaminant loading within the Cache La Poudre watershed for both Alternatives A and B. Also, concerns include impacts to floodplains and wetlands. For example, impacts to natural vegetation and wetlands along Spring Creek and Fossil Creek need to be avoided or mitigated. Wetlands in these areas are highly valued by wildlife including sensitive aquatic species. Natural Resources recommends that more detailed analysis and site specific impacts, including analysis of threatened species,need to be identified and revised, site specific mitigation plans for each drainage should be conducted for the public and with input from appropriate stakeholders. Regarding the Air Quality section of the DEIS, staff notes that a key issue for local air quality improvement is to reduce the growth of vehicle miles traveled, which depends, in turn, upon land use changes that support use of transit, cycling, and walking. For that reason,we believe that land use densification and transit-oriented development should be a key criteria in deciding among the alternatives. Regarding greenhouse gases, several communities in the I-25 corridor DEIS study area, including Fort Collins, Boulder, and Denver, have adopted policies and/or plans to reduce their contribution to greenhouse gas emissions. The State of Colorado also has a Climate Action Plan. Regional transportation planning and projects are one of the major avenues for reducing greenhouse gas emission from the transportation sector. The reduction of transportation carbon emissions, which is directly proportional to vehicle miles traveled,is critical to the success of these community efforts and the EIS should identify how the selected package impacts carbon emissions and the stated goals. Also, the DEIS refers to ozone designation inconsistently throughout the Air Quality chapter. All text should reflect the November 2007 non-attainment designation area for the 8-hour ozone standard. In addition the new, more stringent 8-hour ozone standard promulgated in March 2008 should be discussed. The Air Quality analysis does not address PM2.5, presumably because there are no non-attainment areas with the project study area. However, discussion of particulate matter levels in the Affected Environment chapter (page 3.5-7) acknowledges that PM2.5 24-hour maximum concentrations show a steady trend of increasing in many areas. In light of this,PM2.5 impacts of alternatives should be addressed. Parks and Recreation The only Parks and Recreation facility that is impacted by both Alternatives A and B is the Archery Range located near I-25 and Prospect Road. With Package A, the Archery Range impact is 0.09 acre and with Package B, the impact is 0.14 acre. Construction would need to be coordinated to minimize impacts with the use of Best Management Practices(BMPs)to limit erosion,public safety and City vegetation requirements used to repair disturbed areas. Coordination and mitigation measures would be refined in more detail as the specifics of the preferred alternative are developed. Regulatory and Government Affairs Division Both Packages A and B are projected to increase stormwater contaminant loading by approximately 50%for all modeled contaminants within the Cache La Poudre watershed above the current situation or under the no-action alternative. Runoff intensity and volume and higher pollutant loading are some issues commonly associated with increased imperviousness. December 16, 2008 -6- Item No. 27 With Packages A and B, a much larger percentage runoff from the roads and other impervious surfaces will be treated via water quality ponds or other BMPs than the current situation or the no- action alternative. Advance Planning—Historic Preservation Office The City of Fort Collins Historic Preservation Office has reviewed those sections of the North I-25 Draft EIS document pertaining to historic properties within the Fort Collins Growth Management Area. Staff concurs with the findings that there will be no adverse affects on any historically designated or eligible properties arising from the implementation of the North I-25 project. More detail of staff's comments on each of these areas is provided in the attached summary. City staff will continue to be actively involved with CDOT, FHWA, and FTA throughout the development of the final EIS document in 2009 and will make every effort to convey the input and concerns from the Fort Collins' City organization, City Council, Boards and Commissions, and community members to influence the final recommendations for these significant regional improvements. Based on recent staff discussions with CDOT,there will be additional opportunities for staff input as well as input from City Boards, Commissions, and Council during the development of the Final EIS document in 2009. Next Steps Staff will assemble all comments from City staff and Council and submit a report to CDOT by the December 30,2008 deadline. Based on the many staff comments from City departmentsit is likely more comments will be received from Council and the community. Consequently, there is much more work to be done with CDOT and their partnering agencies as they develop the preferred alternative by Spring 2009 and complete the final North I-25 EIS document by the end of 2009. Staff will bring the North I-25 EIS information to City Boards and Commissions during the first quarter of 2009 to gain their input and feedback regarding CDOT's DEIS document and the proposed packages of improvements. To date, CDOT's DEIS document is adequate in addressing the important transportation needs for Northern Colorado's future. The document includes two packages of possible highway and transit improvements to link Fort Collins to our neighboring communities within the North Front Range as well as to the Denver Metro Area. CDOT staff and their consulting team have incorporated input from City staff to ensure that the proposed alternatives are coordinated with our local adopted land-use and transportation plans and policy documents. However, CDOT needs to provide more detailed information regarding the environmental impacts noted by City's Natural Resources and Regulatory and Government Affairs staff. December 16, 2008 -7- Item No. 27 Staff is committed to continuing to work with CDOT,FHWA,and FTA throughout the completion process for the EIS in 2009 to ensure that Fort Collins concerns are addressed in the selection of the preferred alternative and in the Final EIS document. Timeline December 30, 2008 — Public comments are due to CDOT on the DEIS document, including the packages of highway and transit alternatives. 1 st Quarter 2009 — City staff present North I-25 DEIS, including packages of alternatives to City Boards & Commissions. Local agencies work with CDOT to determine a preferred alternative. 2nd—4th Quarter 2009—CDOT finalizes preferred alternative and develops Final EIS document for public review. The primary staff contacts for the North I-25 EIS are: Kathleen Bracke, Transportation Planning & Special Projects Director, e-mail: kbracke(2fceov.com and phone: (970) 224-6140 Mark Jackson, Transportation Group Director, e-mail: miackson(c-r�fceov.com and phone: (970)416-2029 ATTACHMENTS 1. CDOT North I-25 DEIS Executive Summary, including Package A, B, and No-Action Alternatives. 2. Copy of CDOT North I-25 DEIS Presentation. 3. CDOT North I-25 EIS —October newsletter Draft EIS NORTH I Z5 October 2008 EIS , information. cooperation transportation EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ATTACHMENT 1 2 ES . 1 SUMMARY OF THE ACTION 3 The Federal Highway Administration ( FHWA) 4 and the Federal Transit Administration ( FTA) , in 5 cooperation with the Colorado Department of what's In Executive summary? 6 Transportation ( CDOT ) , have initiated this Draft Executive summary 7 Environmental Impact Statement ( EIS ) to ES . 1 Summary of the Action 8 identify and evaluate multi - modal transportation ES . 2 Other Actions in the Regional Study 9 improvements along the 61 - mile Area 10 1 -25 transportation corridor extending from the ES . 3 Summary of Reasonable Alternatives Considered 11 Fort Collins/Wellington area to Denver. The ESA Summary of Major Environmental 12 improvements being considered in this Draft and Other Impacts 13 EIS would address regional and inter- regional ES . 5 Other Federal Actions Required 14 movement of people , goods , and services in the ES . 6 Next Steps in the NEPA Process 15 1 -25 corridor . The improvements are needed to 16 address mobility , accessibility , safety , and aging infrastructure problems along 1 -25 , as well as to provide for a greater variety of transportation choices . 18 The regional study area ( Figure ES - 1 ) that encompasses these proposed improvements 19 includes 38 incorporated communities . Major population centers in the regional study area 20 include Fort Collins , Greeley , Loveland and communities in the northern portion of the Denver 21 metropolitan area ( Denver Metro Area ) . 22 Two multi - modal build packages ( Packages A and B ) are being evaluated , as well as the No- 23 Action Alternative in accordance with National Environmental Policy Act ( NEPA) requirements . 24 Types of highway improvement being considered as a part of the multi - modal packages include 25 highway widening and interchange reconstruction . Transit improvements being considered in 26 the multi - modal packages include commuter rail , commuter bus , and bus rapid transit ( BRT ) on 27 three different alignments . 28 ES . 2 OTHER ACTIONS IN THE REGIONAL STUDY AREA 29 Two other major actions are being proposed in the regional study area by other governmental 30 agencies . These are : 31 ► Glade Reservoir and the Relocation of US 287 . The Northern Colorado Water 32 Conservancy District is proposing to build a new reservoir in the northwestern corner of the 33 regional study area . This would require relocation of a segment of US 287 north of Fort 34 Collins . 35 ► FasTracks Corridors , The Regional Transportation District ( RTD ) is the existing agency 36 providing transit service in the Denver Metro Area . RTD will build commuter rail along two 37 corridors that will provide service to communities in the regional study area . The FasTracks 38 North Metro Corridor is located along the Union Pacific Railroad corridor just to the east of 39 1 -25 , terminating in Thornton . The FasTracks Northwest Rail Corridor is located along the 40 Burlington Northern Santa Fe Railway ( BNSF ) corridor, which is located adjacent to SH 119 41 between Boulder and Longmont , on the far western edge of the regional study area . Executive Summary ES-1 Draft EIS NORTH I Z5 October 2008 EIS , information coXerxion transportation Figure ES4 North Im25 EIS Regional Study Area ATTACHMENT 1 LEGEND Burlington Northern Santa Fe Wellington it Great Western Railway I — Union Pacific Railroad 287 — — — — Abandoned Railroad Au Right-of-Way , 74 Fort ollin US or Interstate Highway 85 State Highway Thanoth Bevorancrr) Eaton Lucarn• 287 Windsor 1 U 34 Lovel nd 34 Greele Gorden city Brans 60 R 9 LARIMER Dam on Johnstown La Sall ° .361 -' Milliken Berthoud /.. . G crest Mead Flatlarlll 66 Longmont 7 36 ` IL 85 Firestone 287 F adenck Nlwol SZ � ; J 52 — Fert Do" - pion Bould r Erie ° L• yette 36 Louisville Brl on Supone Broomfield ` ^ Thornton Dom roe c y 72 No" tgiera1 est nster E470 Denver International Airport ' TFFERSON — n r - s Una Station t Q 40 D 6 De ver t �la.In North � Executive Summary ESm2 Draft EIS NORTH I Z5 October 2008 EIS , infornation. cooperaTion transportation ES . 3 SUMMARY OF REASONABLE ALTERNATIV&ggACHMENT 1 2 CONSIDERED 3 An extensive process was undertaken to identify a range of alternatives that could be 4 developed to meet the purpose and need of the project . These alternatives were then 5 screened and combined to produce two build packages . These packages , together with the 6 No-Action Alternative , are considered the reasonable alternatives for this proposed action 7 and were fully evaluated in this Draft EIS . 8 The No-Action Alternative ( Figure ES -2 ) would include those transportation projects for which 9 funding has been committed , including the two FasTracks corridors , widening of 1 -25 from 10 SH 52 to SH 66 , replacement of the SH 66/ 1 -25 interchange , modification of the US 34/ 1 -25 11 interchange , and signalization of the SH 402 and the Prospect Road interchange ramp termini . 12 The No-Action Alternative also would include rehabilitation of two structures on 1 -25 at 84th 13 Avenue and 104th Avenue , replacement of pavement on 1 -25 , installation of signals at five 14 interchange ramp termini , and widening of 1 -25 off- ramps at the Prospect/ 1 -25 interchange . 15 Package A ( Figure ES -3 ) would include adding one additional general purpose lane on 1 -25 16 in each direction , for a total of six lanes from SH 66 to SH 14 ( plus auxiliary lanes between 17 Harmony Road and SH 60 ) and a total of eight lanes from E-470 to SH 52 . Interchange 18 reconstructions would be included . Package A also includes a double-tracked commuter rail 19 line using the existing BNSF railroad track plus one new track from Fort Collins to downtown 20 Longmont . The new second track was eliminated for a 500 -foot segment of the corridor in 21 Loveland to avoid the historic Loveland Depot and in a second location — adjacent to a 22 historic residential property at 122 8t" Avenue in Longmont . This would result in 23 bi -directional service along the existing single -track BNSF line near the proposed Loveland 24 station and adjacent to the residential property in Longmont . 25 Also included in Package A would be a new double-tracked commuter rail line that would 26 connect Longmont to the FasTracks North Metro end -of- line station in Thornton . Package A 27 also would include nine commuter rail stations and a commuter rail maintenance facility ; a 28 commuter bus maintenance facility and feeder bus routes along five east-west routes ; and 29 commuter bus service along US 85 between Greeley and downtown Denver and along 30 E -470 from US 85 to Denver International Airport ( DIA) . 31 Package B ( Figure ES -4 ) would include adding one buffer-separated tolled express lane to 32 1 -25 except for the section between SH 60 and Harmony Road , where two barrier-separated 33 lanes would be added . Tolled express lanes (TEL ) would extend from SH 14 to 84t" Avenue 34 in Thornton . Tolled express lanes would be used by high -occupancy vehicles for free , by 35 single-occupancy vehicles if they pay a toll , and by buses . Interchange reconstructions 36 would be included . Package B would also include 12 bus stations providing service along 37 1 -25 , along US 34 into Greeley , and along Harmony Road into Fort Collins . Along US 34 38 and Harmony Road , the buses would travel in mixed traffic . Package B also would include a 39 bus maintenance facility and feeder bus routes along five east-west streets . In addition , bus 40 service would be provided along E -470 from 1 -25 to DIA . 41 Executive Summary ES-3 Draft EIS NORTH I-25 October 2008 EIS information coorerxion transportation Figure ES-2 No-Action Alternative ATTACHMENT 1 LEGEND * Major Structure Rehab by 2030 SHt sHt Ewer Gnat • Minor Structure Rehab by 2030 1 sommon Replace / Rehab Pavement by 2030 • Minor Safety Modifications by 2030 7 MAIN. MM~VIM CR 50 sommon FasTracks Rail Line Lake G" Tlr r D n Bw ® Crew 14 Pm9pecl W sDec1 p1 CSRR FO t _C dins II {7 as cache W N 5 H 3Ba Leconte IwtNs... 34 31 ERAWS 34 POW 40 row 5 sw JohsmS Comer �� �, L. sai LARIMER 9H SO 60 SH 58 66 SH so OI es w ow WELD pp Plattowl P 86 Dog eat 119 BOULDER I we 86 ' 11 ❑ 36 52 52 SO bee tt Are shoo 93 36 0 140 S m sw o ROOM 1 ratoN to Ave ear 1 M. Co reo Net M Northwest 2 Roll CoMdor 3t North metro Cr Q Don o 2 a e a to Un/o ShBon �Iwes North DENVER Executive Summary ES-4 Draft EIS NORTH I-25 October 2008 EIS information. cooperation transportation Figure FS=3 Package A ATTACHMENT 1 LEGEND S„ , 1 New General Purpose Lane J w •a (GPL) in Each Direction (vA` ' • • ua.r•e Yele ■ 1 New General Purpose Lane za7 (GPL) + Auxiliary Lane in Each Direction Fort Collins Downtown Transit Center - BNSF and Wple St. ■ •.n 14. Commuter Rail (CR) csu - Masonst. hetweeo University Ave. and W. Rtkm St. � Commuter Bus (CB) Service on Fort Ilins ° °`°"" 65 U.S $5 South Fort Colins Transit Center - 1 1 „n,,,�,,,. Masan St. and W. Fairway Lane ✓ Imnatll Eero cote Ellen Feeder Bus Service I e as7 92 L.e..ne Interchange Upgrades 87 :,orrlr�1n ~ c rg46L95 34 © Number of Lanes Love nilNord, Oland - BNSF and 29th St. Q Commuter Bus Station / Stop DowntownLoyelaM - BNSF and 74 Greele approximately 6th St ,02 Gordon Coy Q Commuter Rail Station85 l�vsw � t Eee and 42nd St. caw R 50 60 a� FasTracks Rail Line LARIMEf ° """�eo La Sloe* BeAlatd - eN9F Q FasTracks / RTD Transit Station and SH 56 (sa Mlftn d ■ Potential Commuter Rail Operational & Maintenance _ e Facility 36 CR34 WELD Norm Longmont - fiW and SH 66 Mend POW Potential Commuter Bus , 7 6e' — Operational & Maintenance LongmontatSugarMdl - Facility Longmont alignlnaot, southof Rogers Rd. 1 t9 36 I 85 3OULDEi • Fkeeteee , 19 Berle! Rot 52 52 eA WCR 8 Dasene Ede to oulder yeas 193 ' 36 Lenb • w IS Right-of-Way Northwest Preservation Rail Corridor soiled. Ergo Did T ew C.om .. n /r • - •tot North Metro 'E476 Denser • . • Corridor intOM n el r 84MR 2 • • 1211 JEFFER ON e Denve Upion tatron no t p7q`� e y Den er 0 2 .1 G 8 10 �ggggglaurs North Executive Summary ES-5 qq Draft EIS NORTH I b 1 October 2008 EIS infornation cooperxion transportation Figure ES-4 Package B ATTACHMENT 1 :N 1 LEGEND 85 MiMMMM 1 Buffer- Separated Tolled 1 M•rtee vel deficiencies Express Lane (TEL) in Each and replace Direction infrastructure ■ 2 Barrier- Separated Tolled 14 Auk Express Lanes (TEL) in Each Direction Tlary Frt t Vi11N1 US 34 end SH 257 Sau81 Fart Collins Transit Coder - Co � S Bus Rapid Transit (BRT) Route US 287 and Harmony Rd., Fart Collins Eelee (Uses TELs on 1 - 25) '•"' s •aateaaa YYestGreeley - t1s94and I.25 and Harmony Rd. - Fort Collins I 83rd Ave., Gree ey Nn• Feeder Bus Service Windsor - 1-25 arid sH392 ey Downtown Trarsler 267 81h Ave. and 0 Interchange Upgrades Cro1ee.4BttISL. Greeley 34 Lovelorn © Number of Lanes : General 34 Greeley Purpose/Tolled Express Lanes Crossroads Blvd. - Loveland between card" CBr ■ Qossroads Blvd and US 34 02 4 i oa�R 257 Event Bus Rapid Transit Station 50 Cem en - AMeasure La Sells FasTracks Rail Line 56 60 O FasTracks / RTD Transit Station °••el LARIP ' F Potential Commuter Bus I _ Operational & Maintenance 36 ' cR 34 Facility M••d ' .lelteelll 7i B6 / estarle - 1-25 and SH 119 ongmont 119 36 ' I 85 BOULDER _ Fkeele.. L i i B 287 rick WortI (52 ) Fteder arp $and SH H 52 8 . 125 pin can Erb • 11a oulder 1.25 L rettel 7 I -- 93 36 Le•hell •e Right-of-Wily Preservation alyeMe Broomfield on C • Northwest c Rail Corridor H "itNorth Bowel ,t n Metro 7 leloeellenal • Corridor u1•Nt 2 121 JEFFEF. L - 1 Denv I Union tanon 40 I 6 Den ter 0 2 4 6 8 10 _ Miles North Executive Summary ES-6 Draft EIS NORTH I Z5 October 2008 EIS , information. cooperation transportation ESA SUMMARY OF MAJOR ENVIRONMENTAL ATTACHMENT 1 IMPACTS AND MITIGATION 3 Chapter 3 Environmental Consequences and Chapter 4 Transportation Impacts of this Draft EIS 4 include information describing environmental and other impacts to all resources in the affected 5 area . Section 3 . 27 includes a summary of all impacts and Section 3 . 28 includes a summary of all 6 mitigation . This section provides a summary of only the major impacts that would occur . 7 Both build alternatives provide improvements in travel time compared to the No-Action Alternative . 8 In the general purpose lanes , travel would be improved by 10 minutes with Package A and 15 9 minutes with Package B . Using the tolled express lanes , travel time would be 63 minutes faster 10 than the No-Action Alternative . Commuter rail would be 37 minutes faster than driving in the No- 11 Action Alternative and travel on bus rapid transit would be 58 minutes faster . Package A would 12 result in a reduction in traffic on regional study area arterial streets of 4 to 12 percent while 13 Package B would reduce volumes from 0 to 3 percent , compared to the No-Action Alternative . The 14 No-Action Alternative would result in very little physical impact to social , economic , and 15 environmental resources . Air pollution related to traffic congestion would continue to increase and 16 noise impacts from increased traffic also would worsen . Over time , the No-Action Alternative could 17 have a dampening effect on the local economy . 18 Relocation impacts associated with Package A would include 59 residences and 33 businesses 19 compared with 24 residences and 16 businesses associated with Package B . All acquisition or 20 relocation needed for this project would fully comply with the Uniform Relocation Assistance and 21 Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 , as amended . 22 Air emissions associated with both build packages would be slightly greater than those anticipated 23 under the No-Action Alternative because vehicle miles of travel would be expected to increase . 24 These emissions in 2030 would however, be substantially lower than existing levels for all 25 pollutants and in all alternatives . 26 Traffic noise impacts would occur under both build packages as well as the No-Action Alternative . 27 Package A would impact a few less sites ( 623 sites ) than the No-Action Alternative ( 626 sites ) , 28 while Package B would impact the most sites ( 756 sites ) . Mitigation of traffic noise is 29 recommended for two areas under Package A and for seven areas under Package B . 30 Noise impacts also would occur as a result of transit operations associated with Package A . 31 Moderate noise impacts would be projected to occur at 167 residences along the commuter rail 32 corridor. No severe impacts would be projected to occur . Mitigation is proposed for the majority of 33 these locations . 34 Vibration impacts , affecting 87 residences , would be expected as a result of commuter rail 35 operations associated with Package A . Vibration mitigation would be installed . 36 Wetlands and waters of the U . S . would be impacted along highway and transit corridors . 37 Package A would impact approximately 19 . 34 acres of wetlands and waters of the U . S . Package B 38 would impact just over 20 . 38 acres of wetlands and waters of the U . S . Mitigation would be 39 provided for all wetland impacts in compliance with provisions of the Clean Water Act and requirements of Executive Order 11990 . Executive Summary ES-7 Draft EIS NORTH I Z5 October 2008 EIS , information. cooperation transportation 1 Impacts would occur to 100-year floodplains situated along the corridors . PackagEFAk MgMgN) aqt 2 16 floodplains ( 12 . 8 acres ) , while Package B would impact 12 floodplains ( 13 . 5 acres ) . All 3 floodplain impacts would be mitigated in accordance with Executive Order 11988 , 23 Code of 4 Federal Regulations ( CFR ) 650 , and local regulations . 5 Wildlife and aquatic species habitat would be negatively affected . Package A would impact 6 2 . 01 acres of terrestrial habitat and 1 . 82 acres of aquatic habitat . Package B would impact 7 2 . 35 acres of terrestrial habitat and 2 . 25 acres of aquatic habitat . All impacts would be mitigated to 8 the extent possible . 9 There would be impacts to threatened , endangered , state sensitive and protected animal species . 10 Package A would impact 283 . 35 acres and Package B would impact 358 . 98 acres . Most of these 11 impacts would occur to bald eagle foraging habitat and black tailed prairie dog colonies . All 12 impacts will be mitigated . 13 There are many archaeological and historic properties along the transportation corridors . 14 Ninety-one of these are either on the National Register of Historic Places or have been determined 15 eligible for inclusion on the National Register of Historic Places . Package A would cause an 16 adverse effect to five of these properties and Package B would result in an adverse effect to one of 17 these properties . Mitigation for impacted properties would occur in compliance with (36 CFR 800 ) 18 Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act . 1 . There are 43 existing and proposed parks or recreational properties along the corridors . Package 20 A would affect seven of these properties and Package B would affect eight of these properties . 21 Mitigation for all impacts would be provided in accordance with the requirements of Section 4 (f) of 21 the Department of Transportation Act and 36 CFR 800 . 23 ES . 5 OTHER FEDERAL ACTIONS REQUIRED 24 The following is a list of other federal actions required for either build package : 25 ► Section 404 permit , required from the U . S . Army Corps of Engineers , for discharge of 26 fill materials into wetlands or waters of the U . S . 27 ► Section 106 agreements , required from the State Historic Preservation Officer , related to 28 determinations of effects to historic properties and Memoranda of Agreement ( as needed ) for 29 adverse effects 30 ► Section 4 (f) coordination with the National Park Service , for use of land associated with parks , 31 wildlife refuges , or historic properties 32 ► Section 6 (f) concurrence , required from the National Park Service , for land required from one 33 park ( Grant Park) which was purchased using Land and Water Conservation funds Executive Summary ES-8 Draft EIS NORTH I Z5 October 2008 EIS , infornation. cooperaTion transportation ES . 6 NEXT STEPS IN THE NEPA PROCESS ATTACHMENT 1 2 This Draft EIS has been prepared in compliance with Council on Environmental Quality ( CEQ ) 3 regulations for implementing NEPA (40 CFR 1500 ) , FHWA and FTA environmental impact and 4 related procedures for implementing NEPA and CEQ regulations on highway transportation 5 projects (23 CFR 771 ) , FHWA Technical Advisory T 6640 . 8A , and other applicable laws . This Draft 6 EIS is available to interested parties for review and comment for 45 days . During the review period , 7 a public hearing will be held and all comments recorded . 8 The next step in the NEPA process following the Draft EIS review period is preparation of a 9 Final EIS . The Final EIS will consider the comments received on the Draft EIS and will identify the 10 Preferred Alternative for the project , its impacts , and commitments for mitigation measures . The 11 Final EIS also will be made available for public review and comment . The final step of the NEPA 12 process is preparation of a Record of Decision ( ROD ) , which will document the federal agency 13 decision for the project . The ROD will identify funding for the approved action consistent with 14 regional transportation plans included in the Metropolitan Planning Organization ' s planning 15 documents . 16 It is likely that improvements identified in this Draft EIS will be broken into phases for future 17 analysis in the Final EIS and ROD , due to the length of the corridor and funding availability . 18 Examples of improvements that might be phased include provision of feeder bus service , 19 addition of new lanes for only a portion of the corridor, construction of commuter rail by an 20 initial investment for a single tracked system with passing tracks , construction of only a few 21 transit stations or interchanges , phasing in BRT by providing commuter bus service initially , 22 or replacing only a few bridges initially . Executive Summary ES-9 ATTACHMENT 1 THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK ATTACHMENT 2 EIS Process SCOPING PURPOSE & North 1 =25 EIS NEED DEVELOP ALTERNATIVES Overview Screen Alternatives Level One and Level What ' s Next Two Level Fort Collins Thre December 16 , 2008 We DRAFT EIS " `GF'DOT Are Here PUBLIC & AGENCY REVIEW • FINAL EIS PUBLIC & AGENCY REVIEW III RECORD OF DECISION ( ROD ) 1 Previous Public Committee Involvement Involvement • Technical Advisory Committee Public Meetings - Technical staff representative from each municipal agency (towns , cities , • Scoping ( 2004 ) counties ) • Alternatives Development & Regional Coordination Committee Screening - Levels 1 & 2 ( 2004 ) - Elected Official representative from • Alternatives Development & each municipal agency (towns , cities , Screening - Level 3 ( 2005 ) counties ) • Interchange & Station Small Groups ( 2006 -2007 ) Committee members attended workshops and meetings for scoping , purpose and • Miscellaneous Small Groups need , alternatives development and ( 2004 - 2007 ) screening 2 Package A Purpose & Need NORTH 1-25 EIS LEGEND t New General Purpose Lane / (GPL) in Each Direction PURPOSEt New General Purpose Lane nr TiBLt1ioiAunliary Lane m Each 0 asur.aalr a ■ �u. ANSI . Meet long -term travel needs between Commuter Rail (CR) m �a� r rararra a>— Commuter Bus (CB) Service on ort Ilan the Denver metropolitan area and us as :•_��..� c Feeder Bus Service the rapidly growing population interchange upgrades •' centers along the I -25 corridor north © Number of Lanes Love ndrtra Q Commuter Bus Station / Stop Is Groeb to the Fort Collins -Wellington area . o CommuterRail Station 'a p- aninsion FasTracks Rail Line 0 FasTracls f RTD Transit Station J NEEDS ■ Potential Commuter Rail Operational 6 Maintenance Facility ,w 0 Safety Concerns ■ Potential Commuter Bus 9 M� , ��r`r . Operational d Maintenance Lon moot Mr Facilityea 0 Aging Infrastructure 14 ...-_ rr• rn -.rr 0 Mobility & Accessibility uldor 0 Modal Alternatives •r M bad ` to a«a rno wro r r.A .twrwo. •W.-� .n rl tm z mail, 3 Package A Package A Commuter Bus (CB ) Stations/Stops And Parking Spaces Commuter Rail ( CR ) • US 85 & D Street — Greeley (40 ) Assumed to operate with diesel • 8th Avenue & 241h Street — Greeley (80 ) multiple unit vehicles • US 85 & 42nd Street — Evans (70) • US 85 & Grand Avenue — Platteville (60 ) Operating Plan • US 85 & CR 14 . 5 — Fort Lupton ( 110 ) — Every 30 minutes during AM and PM • US 85 & SH 7 — Brighton ( Exist . RTD park-n- peak periods Ride) p • Colorado Blvd . & 72nd Ave . — Commerce City — Every 60 minutes during off peak ( Proposed RTD park-n- Ride ) — Hours of operation : 4 AM to 1 : 30 AM • Downtown Denver — Denver • Denver International Airport — DIA — Two alternative locations for Operating Plan maintenance facility — Every 30 minutes during AM and PM peak Bus feeder services is provided to periods commuter rail stations — Every 60 minutes during off peak ` NORTIi 1-25 A ` NORTi 1 125 r.. ., EIS EIS _ . JA intwmatmn capaaticn banspWalgn. nlarmat un n:T' raum nan•.putat on ■ a 4 Package B LEGEND N Package A 1 -Separated Tolled Expresspress Lane (TEL) in Each Direction ,n NONE 2 Barrier-Separated Tolled _.an Express Lanes (TEL) in Each aaaa� r Direction t YM l:a n w„r„m Bus Rapid Transit (BRT) Route re+ {,-- Commuter Rail Stations (Uses TELs on 1.25) �r- _ saaft"-a„ & Parking Spaces rc Feeder Bus Servie `'�r�a w — ' liviiFs 0 Interchange Upgrades ` Lowl rnd • Fort Collins Downtown Transit Center © Numoer of Lanes General „ ` Grool. ( 1 OO ) PurpuseJTolled Express Lanes I Ors.rrls„ 5 Bus Rapid Transit Station ro CSU ( None Additional ) FasTracks Rail Line r.r•, O FasTracks l RM Trarae Station • South Fort Collins Transit Center ( 110 ) ■ Potential Commuter Bus Operational 8 Maintenance r a>+ vr • North Loveland ( 140 ) Facility > Ilr_.�r•,n -„� • Downtown Loveland (40 ) 16 ongmont • Berthoud ( 70 ) • North Longmont ( 30 ) alder "= ,,,r • Longmont at Sugar Mill ( 150 ) • 1 -25 and WCR 8 (210 ) - • Connection to FasTracks North Metro �� ""°""" • „„ „-- Corridor Stations ( no new spaces as part of this project ) er. ra w 5 Package B Package B Bus Rapid Transit ( BRT ) Bus Rapid Transit Stations/Stops • Operating Plan • US 287 & Harmony Road — Fort Collins • Harmony Road & Timberline — Fort Collins . 3 Buses per hour peak period • 1 -25 & Harmony Road — Fort Collins • 2 to downtown Denver • 1 -25 & SH 392 — Windsor • 1 -25 between Crossroads & US 34 — Loveland • 1 to DIA . 8th Ave & 8th St — Greeley . 2 Buses per hour off peak • US 34 & 83,d Ave — Greeley • US 34 & SH 257 — Greeley • 1 to downtown Denver • 1 -25 & SH 56 — Berthoud • 1 to DIA • 1 -25 & SH 119 — Firestone • 1 -25 & SH 52 — Frederick/Dacono . Two alternative locations for • 1 -25 & SH 7 — Broomfield maintenance facility • 1 -25 & 120th Ave — Thornton • Downtown Denver & DIA • Bus feeder services is provided to BRT stations NO>rrt i 1-25 Noari t 1-25 EIS f+ r.. �. EIS _I kftmatbn n:Taraum nan•.prrtat sir _ . �nhrmat un rar{:vaurn nan:prntatun � o 6 No -Action Alternative LEGEND * Major Structure Rehab by 2030 , n.a b • Minor Structure Rehab by 2030 0 Replace ! Rehab Pavement Capital Costs • Minor Safety MOEificaDons by 2030 2030Minor Y� Ib.e. Ns ub FasTracks Rail Line tee YN nrR • ma. eb. Ja. Fort 6 line a • , .... • - No Action ( $ 57 M ) - Package A ( $ 2 . 433 B ) >. 7 Lmrel nd �„ � �.wM. $ 1 . 3 B : 1 -25 GPL -- — $ 1 . 1 B : Commuter Rail WELD — $ 28 M : US 85 Commuter Bus • Package B ( $ 2 . 006 B ) �, "•�-• — $ 1 . 85 B : 1 -25 TEL M " — $ 150 M : 1 -25 BRT - an. a. ❑ T Ba.e4b Rd I� � w -- These costs are 2005 dollars . All cost estimates will be updated to current year for FEIS . Ybb.Y. =r � n Obr Steen �br Nerle nbNV1N 7 Public Comment Public Hearing Overview Information • Public Review Ft . Collins — Oct 31 to Dec 30 67 attendees , 10 written comments — Hardcopy available at 26 Longmont locations 39 attendees , 8 written comments • Public Hearings Loveland . Nov 18 - Longmont 90 attendees , 19 written comments — Nov 19 — Fort Collins — Nov 20 — Loveland Additionally , we have received 40 ( 1 -25 & US 34 ) web site comments and comments • Web Access by mail — Throughout review period i i � rig 8 Project Schedule Process to Identify a Preferred Alternative • Remainder of year Assemble DEIS Public Comments — DEIS review Conduct workshops with the TAC/ RCC to recommend a preferred alternative which will — Public hearing be further analyzed in the FEIS — compile comments — May be one of the 3 alternatives identified • Early 2009 or a combination of the components that make up the two build packages — Establish Preferred Alternative — Considerations • FEIS - Remainder of 2009 Purpose and Need — Analysis and address public • Social , economic and environmental comment impacts • Long -term regional vision — Develop document Public comment received on the DEIS — Agency review • Ability to Implement — Public hearing NOM1-2`> 1 -2'> mlmmx rrnns7atation 9 Phased Implementation • Limited funding available for Questions and Comments ? construction • Establish logical phases — Independent utility Contact CDOT : — Address Purpose and Need Carol Parr, Project Manager — Environmental impacts/ mitigation Carol . Parr(a�dot . state . co . us • Prioritization — Need — Logical sequencing — Available funding How to stay involved : • Record of Decision www . cdot . info/northi25eis/ — Commitment to Phase 1 — Intent to construct remaining phases 970 , 352 . 5455 or 303 . 779 . 3384 III III 10 ATTACHMENT 3 October 2008 �- -- - - - NORTH I Z5 14q _ EIS information. cooperation . transportation . IVor th L Ink 1 , THE NORTH 1 - 25 ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT - STUDYING FUTURE TRANSPORTATION IMPROVEMENTS ALONG THE 1 - 25 CORRIDOR FROM THE FORT COLLINS /WELLINGTON AREA TO DENVER . Inside This Update on the Draft Environmental Issue Impact Statement Process Update on the Draft EIS Process . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . I The Colorado Department of Transportation then be used as one piece of the selection process Stay Involved, (CDOT), in cooperation with the Federal Highway for a preferred alternative. Administration (FHWA) and the Federal Transit Be Heard . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 Administration (FTA), has initiated a Draft Envi- The preferred alternative is then studied in Summary of Alternatives ronmental Impact Statement (DEIS) to identify more detail in the Final Environmental Impact Considered . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 and evaluate multi-modal transportation improve- Statement (FEIS) to determine potential impacts ments along the 61 -mile I-25 transportation and mitigation that might be needed to alleviate Locations for DEIS corridor from the Fort Collins /Wellington area to those impacts. Subsequently, an FEIS will be Review. .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ..... . . . . . . . 2 Denver. The purpose and need for the improve- prepared followed by a Record of Decision. ments is to address mobility, accessibility, safety Summary of Alternatives and aging infrastructure problems along I-25, as Stay Involved .Evaluation .. . . . . . . . . ............ . . . . 3 well as to provide for a greater variety of trans- Public Hearings in portation choices. November . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . 4 Be Heard . Two multi-modal packages are being evaluated, Contact Information . . . . . . . . 4 as well as the No-Action Alternative in accordance Public comments are particularly important once with National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) the Draft Environmental Impact Statement has requirements. These packages include: been released. While we hope to see you at one of the public hearings in November, comments will • Package A: Commuter rail, general purpose lane be accepted Oct. 31 through Dec. 30, 2008, by any widening of I-25 and commuter bus on US 85 of the following means: • Package B: Widening of I-25 for tolled Express Lanes and bus rapid transit NORTH I-25 EIS PROJECT OFFICE • The No-Action Alternative Phone: (970) 352-5455 or (303) 779-3384 Web site: www.cdot.info/northi25eis/ A summary of information and results of the Mail: CDOT Region 4 DEIS will be available to the public during three 1420 2nd Street public hearings on Nov. 18, Nov 19 and Nov. 20, Greeley, CO 80631 as part of the 45-day public comment period that will run from Oct. 31 to Dec. 30, 2008. The ' release of the DEIS is a major milestone in the NEPA process, and we urge you to participate in the public hearings and provide us with your feedback on the alternatives being considered and the anticipated impacts. This information will 1 - � S I fix'M _ ar, • :1 . _ _Summary of Alternatives Considered An extensive process was undertaken ramp termini, and widening of I-25 off- Denver and along E-470 from US 85 to to identify a range of alternatives ramps at the Prospect/I-25 interchange. Denver International Airport (DIA). that could be developed to meet the purpose and need of the project. These Package A would include adding one Package B would include adding one alternatives were screened and combined additional general purpose lane on I-25 buffer-separated tolled Express Lane to produce two multi-modal packages in each direction, for a total of six lanes (TEL) to I-25 except for the section (Packages A and B). These packages, from SH 66 to SH 14 (plus auxiliary lanes between SH 60 and Harmony Road, together with the No-Action Alternative, between Harmony Road and SH 60) where two barrier-separated lanes are considered the reasonable alternatives and a total of eight lanes from E-470 to would be added. Tolled Express Lanes for this proposed action and were fully SH 52. Interchange reconstructions would would extend from SH 14 to 84th evaluated within the DEIS. be included. Package A also includes a Avenue in Thornton. Tolled Express double-tracked commuter rail line using Lanes would be used by high-occupancy The No-Action Alternative would include the existing BNSF railroad track plus vehicles for free, by single-occupancy those transportation projects for which one new track from Fort Collins to vehicles if they pay a toll, and by buses. funding has been committed, including downtown Longmont. Also included Interchange reconstructions would be the two FasTracks corridors, widening of would be a new double-tracked included. Package B would also include I-25 from SH 52 to SH 66, replacement of the commuter rail line that would connect 12 bus stations providing service along SH 66/I-25 interchange, modification Longmont to the FasTracks North I-25, along US 34 into Greeley, and along of the US 34/I-25 interchange, and Metro end-of-line station in Thornton. Harmony Road into Fort Collins. Along signalization of the SH 402 and the Package A also would include nine US 34 and Harmony Road, the buses Prospect Road interchange ramp termini. commuter rail stations and a commuter would travel in mixed traffic. Package B The No-Action Alternative also would rail maintenance facility; a commuter also would include a bus maintenance include rehabilitation of two structures bus maintenance facility and feeder facility and feeder bus routes along five on I-25 at 84th Avenue and 104th Avenue, bus routes along five east-west routes; east-west streets. In addition, bus service replacement of pavement on I-25, and commuter bus service along would be provided along E-470 from 1-25 installation of signals at five interchange US 85 between Greeley and downtown to DIA. THE DEIS IS AVAILABLE FOR PUBLIC REVIEW AT THE FOLLOWING LOCATIONS BEGINNING OCT. 31 , 2008: Berthoud Town Hall 328 Massachusetts Ave. Berthoud 80513 Brighton City Hall 22 S . 4th Ave. Brighton 80601 COOT Headquarters 4201 E. Arkansas Ave. Denver 80222 COOT Region 4 Headquarters 1420 2nd St. Greeley 80631 COOT Region 4, Loveland Residency 2207 Hwy. 402 Loveland 80537 City of Longmont Civic Center 350 Kimbark St. Longmont 80501 Dacono City Hall 512 Cherry St. Dacono 80514 Erie Town Hall 645 Holbrook St. Erie 80516 FHWA Colorado Division Office 12300 W. Dakota Ave., Ste. 180 Lakewood 80228 Firestone Town Hall 151 Grant Ave. Firestone 80520 Fort Collins City Building 300 LaPorte Ave. Fort Collins 80522 Fort Collins Regional Library 201 Peterson St. Fort Collins 80524 AL Frederick Town Hall Admin. Bldg. 401 Locust St. Frederick 80530 FTA 12300 W. Dakota Ave., Ste. 310 Lakewood 80228 Greeley City Building 100010th Ave. Greeley 80631 Greeley Lincoln Park Library 919 7th St., Ste. 100 Greeley 80631 Johnstown Town Hall 101 Charlotte St. Johnstown 80534 Longmont Library 409 4th Ave. Longmont 80501 - r Loveland City Hall 500 E. 3rd St. , Ste. 110 Loveland 80537 Loveland Library 300 N . Adams Ave. Loveland 80537 ; Mead Town Hall 441 Third St. Mead 80452 �s Milliken Town Hall 2951 Ash St. Milliken 80543 t — - - - - Northglenn City Hall 11701 Community Center Dr. Northglenn 80233 SW Weld County Building 91510th St. Greeley 80632 Thornton City Hall 9500 Civic Center Dr. Thornton 80229 2 Summary of Alternatives Evaluation The following table summarizes information about the relative responsiveness of the three alternatives to the factors used in the evaluation. Not all environmental factors are included in this table; rather, just those that show a clear difference among alteratives. No -Action Alternative Package A Package B Improving Mobility and Accessibility Regional Vehicle miles of travel (VMT) 48.68 million 49. 15 million 49. 12 million ✓ Regional Vehicle hours of travel (VHT) 1 .53 million 1 .53 million 1 .53 million Freeway VMT 15.7 million 16.6 million 16. 1 million✓ Freeway VHT 325 thousand 330 thousand 327 thousand ✓ Average speed 31 .8 mph 32. 2 mph✓ 32. 1 mph Transit ridership ( commuter services) N/A 51850 51850 Transit market share (to downtown Denver) < 1 % 55% ✓ 50% Highway travel time 128 minutes ( GPL); 118 minutes ( GPL); 113 minutes ( GPL); (AM peak hour, SH 1 to 20th Street) 112 minutes (TEL) 101 minutes (TEL) 65 minutes (TEL)✓ Transit travel time 130 minutes 93 minutes ( rail ) 72 minutes ( BRT)✓ ( Fort Collins South Transit Center to DUS ) ( bus in GPL & TEL where available ) Congested miles on 1 -25 ( PM peak hour) 53 miles 22 miles✓ 22 miles✓ Interchange ramp terminals operating at 20 ramp terminals 3 ramp terminals 2 ramp terminals✓ LOS E or F (AM ) Improving Highway Safety N/A 3,466 crashes 3,410 crashes✓ Transit Safety ( annual injuries) N/A 18✓ 59 Replacing Aging Infrastructure 24 minor rehabilitations 84 new structures 96 new structures./ 2 major rehabilitations 13 modifications of 23 modifications of existing structures existing structures✓ 2 major rehabilitations✓ 0 major rehabilitations 6 minor rehabilitations./ 1 minor rehabilitation Expansion of Transportation Modes of Travel Does not expand Commuter rail , commuter BRT & feeder bus bus, & feeder bus added added Responsiveness to Economic Development Not responsive Responsive to needs Responsive to needs along 1 -25 and BNSF✓ along 1 -25 Environmental Consequences Relocations None 59 residences; 24 residences; 33 businesses 16 businesses/ Traffic noise sites impacted 626 sites 623 sites./ 756 sites Transit noise sites impacted N/A 167 residences None./ Vibration sites impacted N/A 87 residences None./ Wetlands and jurisdictional waters impacted None 19.34 acres./ 20.36 acres Water Quality: acres of impervious surface area None 11946✓ 21001 Floodplains impacted None 12. 8 acres./ 13.5 acres Historic/archaeological properties adversely affected None 5 1 ✓ Parks and recreational properties impacted None 7✓ 8 Wildlife and aquatic species habitat None 2.01 acres terrestrial; 2.35 acres terrestrial; 1 .82 acres aquatic ✓ 2. 25 acres aquatic Threatened , endangered , state sensitive None 283.35 acres/ 358.98 acres & protected species habitat affected Cost (2005 dollars) Capital cost $57 million $2.43 billion $2.00 billion ✓ Annual operating cost $4 million $43 million $20 million./ Annualized cost per user per trip $0.03 $0 . 76 $0 . 58✓ ✓ = Build alternative that performs better N/A = Not Applicable 3 Mark Your Calendars — Contact Information Public Hearings in November North 1 -25 EIS Project Office Phone: (970) 352-5455 or (303) 779-3384 Join the North I-25 Project Team for public hearings to review and comment on the Web site: www.cdot. info/northi25eis/ Draft Environmental Impact Statement. All of the public hearings will take place Mail : CDOT Region 4 from 4:30 p.m. to 7 p.m. at the following locations: 1420 2nd Street Greeley, CO 80631 Nov 18: Longmont Public Library I Meeting Rooms A & B 409 4th Ave., Longmont, CO 80501 Project Team Monica Pavlik, P. E. Nov 19: Fort Collins Lincoln Center I Columbine Room Federal Highway Administration 417 W. Magnolia St., Fort Collins, CO 80521 David Beckhouse Federal Transit Administration Nov. 20: Outlets at Loveland I Space 5617 in the win b arol Parr P ( g Y Levi's)) CDOT Project Manager 5661 McWhinney Blvd., Loveland, CO 80538 Long Nguyen, P. E. (I-25 and US 34 - Exit 257B) CDOT Assistant Project Manager Tom Anzia, P. E. The format for each of the public hearings will include an open house from 4:30 p.m. Project Manager to 5:30 p.m. for reviewing information and asking questions of the project team. Gina McAfee, AICP The project presentation and opportunity for public comment will take place Deputy Project Manager from 5:30 p.m. to 6:30 p.m. The open house will then continue and the project team Kim McCarl, APR will be available from 6:30 p.m. to 7 p.m. for follow-up questions or clarification. Public Involvement Manager 4 i£908 OD /Xa1aaa0 laa4s PUZ 0ZT71 f; u012aN .LOQJ - uoite}aodsueat - uoijeaad000 uogemolui SIl ST-I HIUON RESOLUTION 2008-132 OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FORT COLLINS DOCUMENTING THE CITY COUNCIL'S COMMENTS ON THE NORTH I-25 DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT WHEREAS,the Colorado Department of Transportation("CDOT")is conducting the North I-25 Environmental Impact Statement for the Interstate Highway 25 corridor from Northern Colorado to the Denver Metropolitan area; and WHEREAS,CDOT has released the North I-25 Draft Environmental Impact Statement(the "North I-25 DEIS")document for public comment,which comment must be submitted to CDOT by December 30, 2008; and WHEREAS,City staff members from various City departments have reviewed the North I-25 DEIS and have provided comments to the Council for approval and delivery to CDOT as the City's official comments; and WHEREAS, City staff will continue working with CDOT in 2009 to provide additional comments as part of the final Environmental Impact Statement(the North I-25 Final EIS")process and will also conduct outreach to City boards and commissions and other community representatives to gather additional input and comments which, when completed and compiled,will be forwarded to CDOT for consideration in the development of the North I-25 Final EIS. NOW,THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FORT COLLINS that the document entitled"City of Fort Collins Comments in Response to the Draft I-25 Environmental Impact Statement"dated December 16,2008,attached hereto and incorporated herein by this reference as Exhibit"A,"is hereby approved by the City Council as the City's comments to the North I-25 DEIS, and the City Manager is authorized to deliver the same to the Colorado Department of Transportation. Passed and adopted at a regular meeting of the Council of the City of Fort Collins this 16th day of December A.D. 2008. Mayor ATTEST: City Clerk EXHIBIT A City of Fort Collins Comments in Response to the North I-25 Draft Environmental Impact Statement December 16, 2008 Please note that these are high level, summary comments and not intended to serve as a detailed overview of the I-25 EIS. Transportation Planning: General comment: Transportation Planning staff agrees with the purpose and need of the North I-25 DIES. CDOT, FHWA, FTA, and their consultant team, have been helpful to work with City staff over the years during the development of the EIS alternatives analysis process and development of the DEIS document. Staff recommends that future travel demand forecast modeling be updated by CDOT and their consulting team as part of the Final EIS analysis process to ensure that the most recent transportation and land-use data is used for determining long-term transportation improvements. Also, separate land use data assumptions should be developed for each of the two packages of alternatives based on the expected land use changes that would be driven by the proposed transportation corridor improvements to more accurate reflect the inter-relationship between land use and transportation planning. The DEIS packages "A" and "B"reflect input from City staff regarding compatibility with the City's Transportation Master Plan, Master Street Plan, Transfort Strategic Plan (currently being updated) and the Mason Corridor Master Plan, Environmental Assessment, and Preliminary Engineering documents. Either of the DEIS proposed packages can serve Fort Collins' transportation needs in the future to address both highway and transit improvements. It is important to note that further discussions are necessary with the Fort Collins Boards, Commissions, and City Council in 2009 to reach a formal recommendation to CDOT, and their partnering agencies, regarding a preferred package of improvements. The following summary includes a preview of staff comments for both packages and notes concerns that will need to be addressed by CDOT during the development of the preferred alternative and the Final EIS document in 2009. The proposed improvements shown in Package A, the regional commuter rail service and addition of general purpose lanes on I-25, are very effective to address high-quality transit system improvements as well as general highway travel and safety improvements to serve the Fort Collins community. Package A includes the commuter rail transit alternative using the existing BNSF railroad tracks through Fort Collins and staff agrees with the three passenger rail stations shown at the City's Downtown Transit Center, Colorado State University's Main Campus, and at the City's South Transit Center. Staff appreciates CDOT co-locating the commuter rail stations at the same stations as the City's Mason Corridor Bus Rapid Transit stations to allow for easy passenger transfers. This convenience and potential travel time savings could affect the transit ridership projections and that is one of the reasons for staff s request that future travel modeling(roadway & transit) be completed by the North I-25 EIS team. 1 City Transportation Planning staff does not agree with the need for double-tracking of the BNSF railroad tracks from Prospect Road north through Downtown and believes that the existing single track is sufficient to operate service through Colorado State University (CSU)main campus and through Downtown Fort Collins, as the DEIS states is shown for the downtown Loveland area. Staff has previously shared this comment with CDOT staff and their consultant team. From Transportation Planning's perspective, the regional commuter rail transit alternative, while initially more costly than bus service, is an effective transit configuration for Fort Collins' and Northern Colorado's long-term future because it centers high-quality regional transit service in the heart of the communities along the US287/BNSF railroad corridor to serve the largest population centers. Particularly for the Fort Collins community, the regional commuter rail corridor and three passenger stations are located along our highest density population centers such as Downtown, CSU, and the US287/College Avenue corridor. Locating the regional transit service along this high population corridor allows for easy access from local activity centers and neighborhoods and minimizes the need for people to drive or take local transit routes to access regional transit service. In addition, locating this major regional commuter rail line in the heart of the Fort Collins community will lessen the likelihood of future land development shifts occurring away from the existing central population& activity centers within our community. Fort Collins' adopted Transportation Master Plan and City Plan are based on compact urban development occurring within the core areas of our community. The proposed regional commuter rail alignment along the BNSF corridor supports these transportation and land use master plans. Also, the long-term return on investment that is likely to occur within Fort Collins due to the location of the three proposed regional commuter rail stations would be a strong economic catalyst for additional higher density, mixed-use, transit-oriented development(TOD) over and above what is currently envisioned as part of the Mason Corridor. The potential synergy of high quality local and regional transit service along this central corridor of the Fort Collins community will greatly serve our long-range economic vitality and environmental stewardship values, as well as address our established transportation and land-use goals. The regional commuter rail service along the existing BNSF railroad tracks/corridor will also link Fort Collins into Denver's Regional Transportation District(RTD) FasTrack "Northwest Rail Corridor" commuter rail line that begins in Longmont. This provides a cost-effective opportunity to link the North Front Range regional commuter rail improvements proposed in the North I-25 EIS to the already approved and funded FasTrack's Northwest Rail Corridor. This is a synergistic way to link regional commuter rail passengers from Fort Collins, Loveland, Berthoud to both Denver Union Station as well as to the Boulder area. In regards to adding the general purpose lanes shown along I-25, these additional travel lanes will address safety concerns along I-25 and at the interchanges shown within Fort Collins area, as well as serve as an effective means to address current and future vehicle traffic capacity needs (automobile & freight traffic). These general purpose lanes will not limit the use of the new travel lanes to high-occupancy vehicles or require tolling. 2 Package B: Transportation Planning staff has reviewed CDOT's DEIS Package `B"that includes regional Bus Rapid Transit(BRT) service originating from the City's South Transit Center and making stops at the intersection of Harmony & Timberline roads as well as at the Harmony & I-25 Transportation Transfer Center and then traveling to the Denver area along the center of I-25 in the High Occupancy/Toll (HOT) lanes, also referred to in the DEIS as the Tolled Express Lanes (TEL). The South Transit Center would be a primary connection point for passengers transferring to/from the regional BRT service to the City's Mason Corridor BRT service as well as other local Transfort routes. In addition, the regional BRT service would link into the City's future plans for the Harmony Road"Enhanced Travel Corridor" shown on the City's adopted Structure Plan, Transportation Master Plan, and Transfort Strategic Plan. The down side of the regional BRT alternative is that it does not directly serve the core population and activity centers within Fort Collins such as Downtown, CSU, the central business, employment, and residential areas along US287/College Avenue. The regional BRT service along Harmony Road to I-25 will require people to drive to park& rides on the south end of the City or take local transit routes to transfer to the regional BRT service. The proposed I-25 Tolled Express Lanes would help give advantage to travelers in high- occupancy vehicles such as the regional BRT or carpoolers/vanpoolers as well as support congestion pricing strategies to allow travelers who can afford to pay the toll for speed/convenience purposes. Staffs concern is that the major improvement would not address general travel needs for people who cannot afford the tolls nor do these specially designated lanes address the needs of additional highway capacity for freight vehicles. Overall, Package"A" and `B" are both sound alternatives and propose important transportation safety and capacity improvements for highway users and transit passengers to address the purpose and needs identified for the EIS process. All of the proposed improvements (highway and transit) come at a steep price tag and CDOT, FHWA, and FTA will need to work collaboratively with all of the North Front Range communities, counties, and metropolitan planning organizations to strategize workable financing options for any of these proposed future regional transportation infrastructure improvements. Transportation Planning staff will continue to be actively involved with CDOT, FHWA, and FTA throughout the development of the final EIS document and will make every effort to convey the input and concerns from the Fort Collins' City organization, City Council, and community members to influence the final recommendations for these significant regional improvements. Natural Resources: Natural Resources supports efforts to enhance multi-modal travel systems and supports the Transportation Planning staff I-25 recommendations. Please note that the following comments are high level and not intended to serve as a detailed overview of the I-25 EIS: 3 Part I: Natural Areas General comment: The most troubling issue noted is the possibility of a chain link fence installation along the commuter rail through Natural Areas in the southwest portion of Fort Collins. The fence would be highly disruptive to wildlife movement. General comment: Maps for the EIS are not current and many City of Fort Collins' Natural Areas and Parks are not shown. 3.1: Land use. These figures only show land uses as of 2000 and should be updated. Figure 3.1.2 doesn't show any open space/parks in Fort Collins. Figures 3.1-3 through 3.1-6 do not show all of the Fort Collins area open space/parks. For example, Fossil Creek Regional Open Space is shown as an employment area, even in the 2030 projection. 3.10.5: Ve eg tation. Statement regarding"develop an acceptable revegetation plan" should note that the plan must be acceptable to the City of Fort Collins within its jurisdictional areas, not just acceptable to Larimer County. 3.10-5. Ve eg tation. Removal of large cottonwood trees at the Cache La Poudre and Big Thompson rivers will seriously impair the quality and functionality of the riparian habitat. Bald eagles and other raptors frequently use these areas to perch and hunt from. Similarly the continuous "thread" of riparian habitat is critical to wildlife movement up and down the river corridors. Also, it is not possible to mitigate the loss of a large-diameter native cottonwood tree. Table 3.12.2: Wildlife. Audubon Society has designated Fossil Creek Reservoir as an "Important Bird Area" and the high value for migratory waterfowl and other waterbirds is well- documented. This should be represented in the EIS. Wildlife: Commuter rail appears to be aligned on the McKee Farm which is Larimer County Open Lands property with conservation easements underlying the property that would prohibit new construction. Additional train traffic through the area would be a significant impact to recreation users (noise) and displace wildlife use within a 3,000-acre matrix of protected Fort Collins natural areas. Figure 3-18-1. Parks and Recreation. There are quite a few missing natural areas and open spaces on the map, including Fossil Creek Reservoir Regional Open Space, Coyote Ridge Natural Area, Long View Farm Open Space. Table 3-18-2. Parks and Recreation. This figure is not up to date. There is misinformation about Fossil Creek Reservoir Natural Area(confused with the Regional Open Space; location is east of Timberline,not Timber Lake; etc.). 3-18-3. Parks and Recreation. There will be direct impacts to Long View Farm Open Space, and Colina Mariposa, Hazaleus, and Red-tailed Grove natural areas, as well as indirect impacts (due to proximity)to other natural areas. The EIS states that no parks or recreational resources will be impacted by the commuter rail alternative; however that cannot possibly be true because it goes through and next to a number of natural areas. 3.06. Noise. Noise studies should be conducted at Arapaho Bend Natural Area in Fort Collins. Any expanded use as part of the alternatives analysis needs to consider this site. This open space 4 managed by the City of Fort Collins fall into "Land Use Category A". City staff has noticed that noise levels likely exceed the maximum dB levels outlined by CDOT. This area on the northwest comer of I25 and Harmony Road in Fort Collins should be evaluated. 3.6.4.1. Noise. Any efforts to mitigate road noise (barriers) should consider wildlife movement (deer, antelope) and create wildlife crossings across I25 especially north of Fort Collins and including the Wellington area. Any barriers within the more "metro' area should provide occasional openings to permit the movement of wildlife across the interstate. Table 3.7-5. Water Quality. It is troubling that both action alternatives (Package A and B) will increase stormwater contaminant loading by 50% (for all modeled contaminants) within the Cache La Poudre watershed above the current situation or under the no-action alternative. 3.8-12 (line 39). Wetlands. The EIS identifies the "former rest area site north of the Cache La Poudre River"as a potential mitigation site. In fact that land was transferred to the City of Fort Collins and is not available as a mitigation site. 3.9-12. Floodplains. Impacts to natural vegetation and wetlands along Spring Creek and Fossil Creek need to be avoided or mitigated. Wetlands in these areas are highly valued by wildlife including sensitive aquatic species. More detailed analysis is necessary. 3.9-20 (line 6). Floodplains. The proponents of this project need to identify where wetland mitigation would take place. CDOT or private lands would need to be identified for the mitigation. 3.9 (General Comment) Floodnlains. The mitigation measures for each creek, river, or other drainage is vague, not site specific, and makes it impossible to evaluate for direct and indirect impacts to wetlands and floodplains. The same four mitigation measures are identified for separate drainages. Revised, site specific mitigation plans for each drainage should be conducted for the public and appropriate stakeholders to comment on. 3.13-9 Threatened Species—Environmental Consequences. The approach of conducting an effects analysis on a broad scale is not adequate and the "one size fits all approach"to mitigation is not adequate. Site by site and drainage by drainage analyses need to be conducted to ensure impacts are avoided at best, mitigated at worst. 3.13-12. Threatened Species. Additional lighting adjacent to Fossil Creek Reservoir will further impair the quality of the bald eagle roost site at the Reservoir. This could be mitigated by controlling light leakage or by eliminating lighting from the design of that interchange. Part II: Air Quality General comments on air quality section: Induced land use Air quality in the Fort Collins community is dominated by vehicle emissions. A key issue for local air quality improvement is to reduce the growth of vehicle miles traveled, which depends, in turn, upon land use changes that support use of transit, cycling, and walking. For that reason, 5 we believe that land use densification and transit-oriented development should be a key criteria in deciding among the alternatives. Changed conditions The recent volatility in gasoline prices suggest that the basis of long-range land use and transportation planning may now be in question. For example, what if the land use projections of I-25 corridor communities prove incorrect under a scenario of$3.00/gallon gasoline, or $4.00, or $6.00? What if the trip-production rates used in transportation forecasting are incorrect for the same reason? The EIS should address the risk of making a poor choice from among the alternative due to the uncertainty of future gasoline prices. Greenhouse gases Several communities in the I25 corridor have adopted policies and/or plans to address their contribution to greenhouse gas emissions. The reduction of transportation carbon emissions, which is directly proportional to vehicle miles traveled, is critical to the success of these community efforts and the EIS should address the contribution of the I25 decision toward their success or failure. Ozone Non-Attainment The DEIS refers to ozone designation inconsistently throughout the Air Quality chapter. All text should reflect the November 2007 non-attainment designation area for the 8-hour ozone standard. In addition the new, more stringent 8-hour promulgated in March 2008 should be discussed. PM2.5 The Air Quality analysis does not address PM2.5, presumably because there are no non- attainment areas with the project study area. However, discussion of particulate matter levels in the Affected Environment chapter(page 3.5-7) acknowledges that PM2.5 24-hour maximum concentrations show a steady trend of increasing in many areas. In light of this, PM2.5 impacts of alternatives should be addressed. More Specific Comments: 3.5 Introduction The DEIS text in the introductory section of the air quality chapter should be updated to reflect that areas within the project have been designated non-attainment for the federal 8-hour ozone standard in November 2007, per discussion in section 3.5.2, line 3.5.2-Affected Environment Figure 3.5-1 should be updated to reflect the non-attainment designation area for the 8-hour ozone standard. This non-attainment designation should be discussed clearly in this section, as well as the updated, more stringent 8-hour ozone standard that was promulgated in March 2008. 6 The EIS states, on lines 13 and 14,that: "Other criteria pollutants are no longer pollutants of concern in the Front Range area." In fact,particulate matter levels even below the federal health standards impact the health of individuals with respiratory sensitivity. The City of Fort Collins has a policy to "continually improve air quality as the city grows". Table 3.5-2 should be updated to reflect the second ozone monitoring site that was established in west Fort Collins in 2006 and should be updated to reflect data reported through 2007, not 2005. Discussion of criteria pollutants should acknowledge that the Fort Collins West monitoring site had the highest 8-hour ozone reading of the entire Front Range in 2007 and has recorded several 8-hour values that exceed the standard. Greenhouse gas emissions should be discussed in the Affected Environment section, not only briefly addressed in the Cumulative Impacts section. Within the DIES study area, the communities of Fort Collins, Boulder and Denver has active commitments and plan to reduce greenhouse gas emissions. The State of Colorado also has a Climate Action Plan. Regional transportation planning and projects are one of the major avenues for reducing greenhouse gas emission from the transportation sector. In April 2007, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that greenhouse gases such as carbon dioxide fit within the definition of"air pollutant" under the Clean Air Act("Act") and the EPA is now in the process of determining whether, in its judgment, greenhouse gases cause or contribute to air pollution "which may reasonably be anticipated to endanger public health or welfare." It is conceivable that greenhouse gas emissions will need to be addressed more rigorously in future NEPA processes. 3.5.3.4 - PM analysis The Air Quality analysis does not address PM2.5, presumably because there are no non- attainment areas with the project study area. However, discussion of particulate matter levels in the Affected Environment chapter(page 3.5-7) acknowledges that PM2.5 24-hour maximum concentrations show a steady trend of increasing in many areas. In light of this, PM2.5 impacts of alternatives should be addressed. Parks & Recreation: Comments on the DEIS from the view point of affected City of Fort Collins parks and trails: No-Action Alternative: No impact on Fort Collins parks and trails. Section 3.18 Parks and Recreation, Review: Archery Range, Creekside Park, Lee Martinez Park, Old Fort Collins Heritage Park and Washington Park listed as being in the area of the project. Only affected park is the Archery Range. Package A: Archery Range impact of 0.09 acre. Construction would be coordinated to minimize impacts with the use of BMPs to limit erosion,public safety and City vegetation requirements used to repair disturbed areas. Coordination and mitigation measures would be refined in more detail as the specifics of the proposed alternative are developed. 7 Package B: Archery Range impact of 0.14 acre. Construction would be coordinated to minimize impacts with the use of BMPs to control erosion,public safety and City vegetation requirements used to repair disturbed areas. Coordination and mitigation measures would be refined in more detail as the specifics of the proposed alternative are developed. Advance Planning—Historic Preservation Office: The City of Fort Collins Historic Preservation Office has reviewed those sections of the North I- 25 Draft EIS document pertaining to historic properties within the Fort Collins Growth Management Area. Staff concurs with the findings that there will be no adverse affects on any historically designated or eligible properties arising from the implementation of the North I-25 project. Regulatory and Government Affairs Division: Please note that these are high level comments and not intended to serve as a detailed overview of the I-25 DEIS. Section 3.7 Water Resources 3.7.1 Water Resources Regulations General Comment: While the CDOT MS4 requirements described are generally only applicable in MS4 areas, please note that all local MS4 construction and development requirements must also be met within the local MS4 jurisdictional boundaries. Table 3.7-5 Both packages A and B are projected to increase stormwater contaminant loading by approximately 50% for all modeled contaminants within the Cache La Poudre watershed above the current situation or under the no-action alternative. Runoff intensity and volume and higher pollutant loading are some issues commonly associated with increased imperviousness. The modeled pollutant loadings are before the application of best management practices. Does this include both those used during construction and permanent water quality structures? With packages A& B, a much larger percentage runoff from the roads and other impervious surfaces will be treated via water quality ponds or other BMPs than the current situation or the no-action alternative. This area is figured based on current and projected future MS4 areas and the area available for BMPs within the right-of-way. The pollutant removal rates for structural BMPs are given as follows: TSS - 50-70% Total P - 10-20% Zn - 30-60% Cu - 1.4-30% Chloride - not given While this may appear that the increased pollutant loadings will not be adequately treated for all parameters, increased impervious area will be treated with packages A&B. City of Fort Collins Water& Wastewater Utilities Department 8 No comments 9