north metro corridor · the north metro corridor project proposes approximately 18 miles of...
TRANSCRIPT
North Metro CorridorFinal Environmental Impact Statement and Final Section 4(f) EvaluationExecutive Summary
R e g i o n a l T r a n s p o r t a t i o n D i s t r i c t
January 2010
Presented to:
Final Environmental Impact Statement and Section 4(f) Evaluation
North Metro Corridor
ES-i January 2011
TABLE OF CONTENTS
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ........................................................................................................ ES-1
ES.1 INTRODUCTION ............................................................................................. ES-1 ES.1.1 Why Was this Report Written? ............................................................. ES-6 ES.1.2 Where Is this Project? .......................................................................... ES-7 ES.1.3 How Do You Read the FEIS? .............................................................. ES-7
ES.2 PURPOSE AND NEED ................................................................................... ES-8 ES.2.1 Why Do We Need this Project? ........................................................... ES-8
ES.2.1.1 Purpose .............................................................................. ES-8 ES.2.1.2 Needs ................................................................................. ES-9
ES.2.2 What Are the Goals of this Project? ..................................................... ES-9
ES.3 ALTERNATIVES CONSIDERED ..................................................................... ES-9 ES.3.1 Alignment Alternatives ....................................................................... ES-11
ES.3.1.1 Additional Options for Sand Creek Junction in the Southern Section ............................................................. ES-12
ES.3.1.2 Technology Alternatives ................................................... ES-12 ES.3.1.3 Station Locations ............................................................. ES-14
ES.3.2 How Were the Alignment and Technology Alternatives Evaluated? .. ES-14 ES.3.2.1 Alternatives Evaluation Screening Criteria ....................... ES-14 ES.3.2.2 Summary of Alternatives Evaluated in the DEIS .............. ES-15 ES.3.2.3 Summary of Screening Results and DEIS Evaluation ..... ES-16
ES.3.3 Station Screening .............................................................................. ES-18 ES.3.3.1 Station Evaluation Screening Criteria .............................. ES-18 ES.3.3.2 Results from the Station Screening Process .................... ES-18
ES.3.4 What Are the Alternatives Presented in the FEIS? ............................ ES-18 ES.3.5 What Is the No Action Alternative? .................................................... ES-19
ES.3.5.1 Transit Projects ................................................................ ES-19 ES.3.5.2 Highway Projects ............................................................. ES-19
ES.3.6 What Is the Preferred Alternative? ..................................................... ES-19 ES.3.6.1 Proposed Alignment ......................................................... ES-19 ES.3.6.2 Proposed Technology ...................................................... ES-23 ES.3.6.3 Stations ............................................................................ ES-24 ES.3.6.4 Proposed Train Service ................................................... ES-24 ES.3.6.5 Commuter Rail Maintenance Facility ............................... ES-24
ES.3.7 Cost and Financing ............................................................................ ES-25
ES.4 AFFECTED ENVIRONMENT AND ENVIRONMENTAL CONSEQUENCES ........................................................................................ ES-25 ES.4.1 What Human or Environmental Resources Were Considered? ........ ES-25 ES.4.2 What Kinds of Environmental Effects Would the Project Have? ........ ES-25
ES.4.2.1 Social Impacts and Environmental Justice ...................... ES-26 ES.4.2.2 Land Use, Zoning, and Economic Considerations ........... ES-26 ES.4.2.3 Land Acquisition, Displacements, and Relocation of
Existing Uses ................................................................... ES-27 ES.4.2.4 Archaeological, Historic, and Paleontological
Resources ........................................................................ ES-27 ES.4.2.5 Visual and Aesthetic Qualities ......................................... ES-28
Final Environmental Impact Statement and Section 4(f) Evaluation
North Metro Corridor
January 2011 ES-ii
ES.4.2.6 Parklands and Recreation Areas ..................................... ES-28 ES.4.2.7 Noise and Vibration .......................................................... ES-29 ES.4.2.8 Natural Resources – Wetlands ........................................ ES-29 ES.4.2.9 Hazardous Materials ........................................................ ES-30 ES.4.2.10 Public Safety and Security ............................................... ES-30 ES.4.2.11 Section 4(f) ....................................................................... ES-30
ES.5 TRANSPORTATION ..................................................................................... ES-31 ES.5.1 What Impacts Would the Preferred Alternative Have on Transit? ..... ES-31 ES.5.2 What Roadway Impacts Would the Project Have? ............................ ES-33 ES.5.3 What Railroad/Roadway Crossing Improvements Would Be
Made? ......................................................................................... ES-33 ES.5.4 What Are the Impacts to Freight Rail Operations? ............................ ES-33
ES.6 PUBLIC COMMENT AND AGENCY COORDINATION ................................ ES-33 ES.6.1 How Has the Public Been Involved With This Project? ..................... ES-34 ES.6.2 How Have Agencies Been Involved? ................................................. ES-34
ES.6.2.1 Local Governments Team ................................................ ES-35 ES.6.2.2 Agency Working Group .................................................... ES-35
ES.6.3 How Can the Public Provide Effective Input to FTA and RTD? ......... ES-35
ES.7 WHAT ARE THE REMAINING ISSUES TO BE RESOLVED? ..................... ES-36
List of Figures
Figure ES-1. North Metro Corridor Study Area Showing the Preferred Alternative ............... ES-2
Figure ES-2. North Metro Corridor Study Area ...................................................................... ES-7
Figure ES-3. Initial Alignments Considered for the North Metro Corridor ............................ ES-10
Figure ES-4. Southern Section Alignments to Commerce City ............................................ ES-13
Figure ES-5. Alternatives Screening Process ...................................................................... ES-17
Figure ES-6. Preferred Alternative Detail — DUS Access to 74th Avenue ........................... ES-20
Figure ES-7. Preferred Alternative Detail — 74th Avenue to 120th Avenue .......................... ES-21
Figure ES-8. Preferred Alternative Detail — 120th Avenue Area to 162nd Avenue Area ...... ES-22
Figure ES-9. Commuter Rail Typical Trackway (Tangent Section) ...................................... ES-23
Figure ES-10. Typical A-Weighted Sound Levels ................................................................ ES-29
Figure ES-11. Quiet Zone .................................................................................................... ES-29
Figure ES-12. North Metro Corridor System-Wide Daily Linked Transit Trips (2035) .......... ES-31
Figure ES-13. Travel Time Comparison 162nd Avenue to Denver Union Station (2035) ...... ES-32
Figure ES-14. Coordination Process and Project Schedule ................................................ ES-34
Final Environmental Impact Statement and Section 4(f) Evaluation
North Metro Corridor
ES-iii January 2011
List of Tables
Table ES-1. Summary of Operations and Cost Elements ...................................................... ES-4
Table ES-2. FEIS Preferred Station Options Recommended by the DEIS ............................ ES-5
Table ES-3. Parking Summary ― Horizon Year1 ................................................................... ES-5
Table ES-4. Major Changes in Impacts between the DEIS and FEIS ................................... ES-6
Table ES-5. Goals for the North Metro Corridor Study Area Fixed-Guideway Transit Project ................................................................................................................ ES-9
Table ES-6. Alignment and Technology Alternatives ........................................................... ES-11
Table ES-7. Alternatives Evaluation Criteria at Each Level of Screening ............................ ES-14
Table ES-8. Resources Evaluated in the North Metro Corridor FEIS .................................. ES-25
Table ES-9. Study Area Vehicle Miles Traveled, Vehicle Hours Traveled, and Vehicle Hours of Delay Comparison (Average Weekday 2035) ................................... ES-32
Table ES-10. Proposed Mitigation Measures — Elements of the Preferred Alternative ...... ES-38
Final Environmental Impact Statement and Section 4(f) Evaluation
North Metro Corridor
January 2011 ES-iv
Final Environmental Impact Statement and Section 4(f) Evaluation
North Metro Corridor
ES-1 January 2011
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
ES.1 INTRODUCTION
The Federal Transit Administration (FTA), in cooperation with the Regional Transportation District (RTD) prepared this Final Environmental Impact Statement (FEIS) for the North Metro Corridor Project to be in compliance with the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (NEPA). The North Metro Corridor Project proposes approximately 18 miles of commuter rail transit from downtown Denver, Colorado, north to State Highway (SH) 7. North Metro would serve Denver, Commerce City, Thornton, Northglenn, and Adams County (see Figure ES-1).
The Preferred Alternative would be located adjacent to and east of the existing BNSF Brush Subdivision from the Denver Union Station (DUS) access in Denver to roughly the Adams County line. The alignment would then leave the BNSF Railway right-of-way (ROW) to proceed north on a cross-country alignment that generally parallels O’Brian Canal to the west to bypass Sand Creek Junction, and then would be located within the existing Union Pacific (UP) Boulder Branch Alignment between 70th Avenue and the SH 7/162nd Avenue area.
In 2009, RTD purchased the UP Boulder Branch ROW. Although the UP Railroad no longer owns this rail alignment, for the purposes of this document, it will continue to be referred to as the UP Boulder Branch. The UP Boulder Branch stretches 33 miles from Brighton Boulevard in Commerce City to the Valmont Power Plant in Boulder. Only the first 12 miles (southern end) will be used for the North Metro Corridor.
Transit users will be able to access North Metro from eight stations in the corridor.
This FEIS has been prepared in accordance with the Council on Environmental Quality regulations (40 Code of Federal Regulations [CFR] 1500) and the joint FTA/Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) regulations (23 CFR 771 and 23 CFR 774). The FEIS is to be released for public and agency review on 28 January 2011, with a comment period ending 1 March 2011. During this period, RTD will hold public hearings, at which time formal comments will be taken and recorded as part of the public record for this project. Comments can also be submitted as described in Section ES.6, Public Comment and Agency Coordination. Comments will be considered and responded to in the Record of Decision (ROD).
Final Environmental Impact Statement and Section 4(f) Evaluation
North Metro Corridor
January 2011 ES-2
FIGURE ES-1. NORTH METRO CORRIDOR STUDY AREA SHOWING THE PREFERRED ALTERNATIVE
Final Environmental Impact Statement and Section 4(f) Evaluation
North Metro Corridor
ES-3 January 2011
What Happened Since the Release of the Draft Environmental Impact Statement (DEIS)?
The principle activities and refinements to the project that occurred between the DEIS and FEIS can be summarized as follows:
Key issues unresolved at the end of the DEIS: There were two key issues unresolved in the DEIS. Those issues were choosing the Preferred Alternative alignment and the preferred station alternative in Denver. In addition, there were a number of public comments and comment from the City of Thornton on the DEIS regarding the 88th Avenue Station alternative recommended in the DEIS. All of these issues are addressed in this FEIS and are described below.
Concerns over safety adjacent to Suncor Refinery in the A-3 alignment, along with conflicts with existing railroad operations led to the B-2 alternative denoted in the DEIS being chosen as the Preferred Alternative in the FEIS. Comments from the public also showed more overall support for the B-2 Alternative. This FEIS therefore recommends the B-2 alignment as the Preferred Alternative.
Subsequent to the release of the DEIS, the City and County of Denver held a public meeting soliciting comment on the two station alternatives for the Denver station: Coliseum/Stock Show South or Coliseum/Stock Show North. The City and County of Denver and the public showed overwhelming support for the Coliseum/Stock Show North station (renamed the National Western Stock Show Station) and that station is recommended in this FEIS as the Preferred Alternative.
Comments from the public and the City of Thornton led to the changing of the Preferred Alternative for the 88th Avenue Station in this FEIS to the 88th Avenue Station with Relocated Welby Road. The City of Thornton has now committed to relocating Welby Road and the station alternative recommended in this FEIS reflects that action.
Response to Comments: Agency and public comments received on the DEIS were addressed and incorporated into the FEIS, where appropriate. Chapter 8, Response to Agency and Public Comments provides a table with responses to all agency and public comments received during the public comment period following the release of the DEIS. The following are the more prevalent comments heard:
Support for the North Metro line being built sooner. Support for the Electrical Multiple Unit (EMU) vehicle technology. Support for the B-2 Southern Alignment with some support for the A-3 Alignment. Support for the National Western Stock Show Denver Station.
Updated Travel Demand Estimates: The Denver Regional Council of Governments updated regional land use and travel demand forecasts for 2035. This information was incorporated into the travel demand forecasts for North Metro Corridor resulting in higher ridership and greater parking demand at the stations.
Change in Assessment Periods: Opening day changed from 2015 to 2020 and the future horizon date changed from 2030 to 2035 to reflect the most recent regional planning assumptions.
Final Environmental Impact Statement and Section 4(f) Evaluation
North Metro Corridor
January 2011 ES-4
Refinement of Preferred Alternative: Based on changes in travel demand, refinement of the operations plan, and coordination with local governments on stations, the Preferred Alternative was refined.
Revised Impacts and Mitigation Measures: Based on updated design of the Preferred Alternative, impacts were reassessed and mitigation measures were refined.
The specific changes related to the Preferred Alternative follow.
Operations & Costs: Opening day changed from 2015 to 2020 and the future horizon date changed from 2030 to 2035. Table ES-1 summarizes the main differences in operations and cost elements from the DEIS to the FEIS:
TABLE ES-1. SUMMARY OF OPERATIONS AND COST ELEMENTS Operations and Cost Elements DEIS (2030) FEIS (2035)
Ridership 14,300 daily riders 24,500 daily riders
Total Opening Day Parking 3,100 spaces 4,020 spaces
Total Horizon Year Parking 3,670 spaces 8,490 spaces
Travel Time 27 minutes 32 minutes
Train Sets 3-car 4-car
Opening Day Capital Cost1 $1.066 Million $910 Million
Source: North Metro Corridor Project Team, 2010.
Notes: 1 Based on Annual Program Evaluation
Alignment: In the Southern Section the B-2 alignment option was selected as part of the Preferred Alternative. In the DEIS, the Build Alternative included a double-track configuration between DUS and just south of 128th Avenue and a single-track configuration from this point to the end of line. In the FEIS, the alignment is single-track with passing track segments in five locations. In addition, an overpass was selected for the 104th Avenue and 120th Avenue grade separations.
Stations: Preferred station locations were selected for the eight stations as shown in Table ES-2. The station layouts were refined to reflect ongoing coordination with local governments and agencies. In addition, the station layouts were revised to accommodate the increased ridership, including adding parking structures at five of the stations, as shown in Table ES-3.
Final Environmental Impact Statement and Section 4(f) Evaluation
North Metro Corridor
ES-5 January 2011
TABLE ES-2. FEIS PREFERRED STATION OPTIONS RECOMMENDED BY THE DEIS
Station Target Area DEIS Station Options FEIS Station Name
Coliseum/Stock Show (Denver)
Coliseum/Stock Show South
Coliseum/Stock Show North (No recommendation made in DEIS)
National Western Stock Show (FEIS recommended Coliseum/Stock Show North which was renamed to National Western Stock Show Station)
Commerce City 68th Avenue
72nd Avenue South (recommended)
72nd Avenue (same as DEIS recommendation)
88th Avenue (Thornton)
88th Avenue (recommended)
88th Avenue with Welby Road Relocation
88th Avenue (FEIS changes recommended alternative to 88th Avenue with Welby Road Relocation and alternative is renamed 88th Avenue)
104th Avenue (Thornton) 104th Avenue (recommended) 104th Avenue (same as DEIS recommendation)
112th Avenue (Northglenn)
112th Avenue Parking West of York Street (recommended)
112th Avenue Parking East of York Street
112th Avenue (same as DEIS recommendation)
124th Avenue (Thornton) 124th Avenue (recommended) 124th Avenue/Eastlake (same as DEIS recommendation)
144th Avenue (Thornton)
144th Avenue West (recommended)
144th Avenue East
144th Avenue Split
144th Avenue (same as DEIS recommendation)
162nd Avenue (Thornton)
162nd Avenue West
162nd Avenue East (recommended)
SH 7/162nd Avenue (same as DEIS recommendation)
Source: North Metro Corridor Project Team, 2010.
TABLE ES-3. PARKING SUMMARY ― HORIZON YEAR1 Station/park-n-Ride DEIS Parking Spaces FEIS Parking Spaces
National Western Stock Show 120 (surface) 210 (surface)
72nd Avenue 300 (surface) 330 (surface)
88th Avenue 500 (surface) 1,500 total (structure)
104th Avenue 550 (surface) 1,460 total 740 (structure) 720 (surface)
112th Avenue 300 (surface) 1,200 (structure)
124th Avenue/Eastlake 400 (surface) 960 (structure)
144th Avenue 400 (surface) 370 (surface)
SH 7/162nd Avenue Area 1,100 (surface) 2,460 total 2,300 (structure) 1,60 (surface)
TOTAL 3,670 8,490
Source: North Metro Corridor Project Team, 2010.
Note: 1 DEIS horizon year is 2030, FEIS horizon year is 2035
Final Environmental Impact Statement and Section 4(f) Evaluation
North Metro Corridor
January 2011 ES-6
Major Changes in Impacts: Table ES-4 summarizes the major changes in impacts between the DEIS and FEIS.
TABLE ES-4. MAJOR CHANGES IN IMPACTS BETWEEN THE DEIS AND FEIS Resource Area DEIS Impact FEIS Impact
Land Acquisition, Displacements, and Relocation of Existing Uses
13-17 business relocations Zero to six residential relocations 80-106 acres of acquisition
Six business relocations One residential acquisition 121.68 acres of acquisition
Parklands and Recreation Areas Four parks and eight recreational trails/multi-use path facilities
Eight parks and 13 recreational trails/multi-use path facilities
Noise and Vibration 139 moderate (8 upper) and four severe post mitigation impacts 37,200 to 39,600 linear feet of noise barriers
180 moderate (one upper) and no severe post mitigation impacts 16,500 linear feet of noise barriers
Wetlands 2.6 to 3.0 acres of wetlands 2.3 to 3.8 acres of other water features
2.0 acres of wetlands 2.0 acres of other water features
Section 4(f) Direct use of between 14 and 18 Section 4(f) resources (between 9 and 13 of which are anticipated to be de minimis impacts)
Direct use of 26 Section 4(f) resources (22 of which are de minimis impacts)
Source: North Metro Corridor Project Team, 2010
ES.1.1 Why Was this Report Written?
This document was written to describe the alternative development and evaluation process, to assist decision-makers and the public in understanding the benefits of the proposed action, to identify a Preferred Alternative, and to address the potential impacts associated with implementation of the North Metro Corridor Project. It follows the NEPA requirements to evaluate the impacts to the human and natural environment that would result from development of the project, and describes the recommended mitigation measures to off-set unavoidable impacts. A ROD from the FTA will be required before the project can be advanced to final design, ROW acquisition, equipment and facilities procurement, and construction.
Final Environmental Impact Statement and Section 4(f) Evaluation
North Metro Corridor
ES-7 January 2011
ES.1.2 Where Is this Project?
As shown in Figure ES-2, the North Metro corridor study area is a wedge-shaped area and includes lower Downtown Denver at the southern boundary, and the Adams County-Weld County line at the northern boundary. The North Metro corridor study area is in the Denver, Colorado, metropolitan area and encompasses the northern portion of the City and County of Denver (CCD), parts of Commerce City, the cities of Northglenn and Thornton, and parts of Adams County. The corridor is southwest of Brighton. Residents of all these jurisdictions would use the service.
ES.1.3 How Do You Read the FEIS?
The FEIS is organized as follows:
Executive Summary – Provides a summary of the document, including a project description, the Purpose and Need, alternatives considered, affected environment and environmental consequences (and recommended mitigation measures), transportation, evaluation of alternatives, and public comment and agency coordination.
Chapter 1: Purpose and Need – Presents a discussion of the purpose of the project, the need for mobility improvements, and the goals for the project.
Chapter 2: Alternatives Considered – Describes the alternatives development and screening process used to identify and define the No Action Alternative and Preferred Alternative to be evaluated in detail for the North Metro corridor study area.
Chapter 3: Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences – Describes the existing social, economic, and natural environmental conditions in the North Metro corridor study area and in smaller project study areas, which vary in size by resource, and the anticipated impacts associated with the No Action Alternative and Preferred Alternative. The information is organized by resource topics, alignments, and stations. Mitigation measures are also identified in this chapter. These mitigation measures will be finalized in the ROD.
Chapter 4: Transportation – Discusses the existing transportation system and the anticipated benefits and impacts that would result from implementation of the No Action Alternative and Preferred Alternative. Potential mitigation measures are also identified.
Chapter 5: Evaluation of Alternatives Considered – Provides a comparative analysis of the No Action Alternative and Preferred Alternative regarding how well they meet the project Purpose and Need. A financial summary and feasibility is also provided.
FIGURE ES-2. NORTH METRO CORRIDOR STUDY AREA
Final Environmental Impact Statement and Section 4(f) Evaluation
North Metro Corridor
January 2011 ES-8
Chapter 6: Public Comment and Agency Coordination – Describes the public involvement process, including coordination with the Local Governments Team (LGT), the Agency Working Group (AWG), and the general public for selecting the Preferred Alternative. The AWG includes the joint lead agencies, RTD and FTA, cooperating and participating agencies, and the railroads.
Chapter 7: Final Section 4(f) and 6(f) Evaluation – Describes the results of the Section 4(f) and 6(f) analyses conducted to demonstrate the protection of parklands, recreational resources, wildlife and waterfowl refuges, and historic sites.
Chapter 8: Response to Agency and Public Comments – Provides and lists responses to all agency and public comments received during the public comment period following the release of the Draft Environmental Impact Statement (DEIS).
References – Lists the sources for all references cited in this document
Appendix A – List of Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) Preparers
Appendix B – List of EIS Recipients
Appendix C – Basic Engineering
Appendix D – Cultural Resources Information
Appendix E – North Metro Corridor Coordination Plan
Appendix F – Agency Correspondence
Appendix G – FasTracks Programmatic Cumulative Effects Analysis
Appendix H – 404(b)(1)
ES.2 PURPOSE AND NEED
ES.2.1 Why Do We Need this Project?
Transit options to serve the North Metro corridor study area have been studied for more than 20 years. Previous studies have consistently shown that mobility improvements have been needed for many years. Multi-modal travel alternatives to the single-occupant vehicle in the corridor would support this need. The purpose and supporting needs of the project are described below.
ES.2.1.1 Purpose
The purpose for the proposed North Metro Corridor Project is to implement high-capacity, fixed-guideway transit within the North Metro corridor between DUS access and the 162nd Avenue area.
Final Environmental Impact Statement and Section 4(f) Evaluation
North Metro Corridor
ES-9 January 2011
ES.2.1.2 Needs
This study addresses several transportation-related issues in the North Metro corridor study area. In summary, the North Metro Corridor Project would help meet the following needs:
Need for mobility improvements.
Need for regional connectivity.
Need to serve traditional and new transit users.
Need to support community and regional plans, including the voter-approved FasTracks Plan (RTD 2004).
Need to qualify for federal funding programs.
ES.2.2 What Are the Goals of this Project?
The goals for the North Metro Corridor Project were used to define the evaluation criteria for the alternatives considered in this FEIS. These goals were endorsed through the agency and public processes conducted for the project, and are listed in Table ES-5.
TABLE ES-5. GOALS FOR THE NORTH METRO CORRIDOR STUDY AREA FIXED-GUIDEWAY TRANSIT PROJECT
Goal Description Objective
1 Provide a cost-effective high-capacity transit option in the North Metro corridor study area.
Best Value
2 Provide a high-quality and reliable transit service that reduces travel times, reduces delays, and encourages travel by more efficient and environmentally sensitive means than motor vehicle travel.
High Reliability and Performance
3 Provide system linkage with other FasTracks corridors. Improved Efficiency
4 Fulfill existing land use and transit oriented development plans in the North Metro corridor study area.
Sustainable Land Use
5 Enhance access to jobs, entertainment, recreation, shopping, and other activities for existing and future residents of the North Metro corridor study area.
Improved Local Economy
6 Provide equitable transit opportunities regardless of financial means, to the North Metro corridor study area residents and employees.
Equal Opportunity
7 Improve the environmental sustainability and development of communities. Sustainable
Communities
Source: North Metro Corridor Project Team, 2008.
ES.3 ALTERNATIVES CONSIDERED
The North Metro Corridor EIS evaluated numerous alternatives to meet the Purpose and Need for the corridor. Alternatives were developed and evaluated to address the travel markets in the North Metro corridor study area, to minimize environmental impacts, and in response to input from the agency and public involvement process. The alternatives each include several elements, including alignments, transit modes, vehicle technologies, transit station locations, and service. The range of alignment corridors considered for the alternatives is illustrated in Figure ES-3.
Final Environmental Impact Statement and Section 4(f) Evaluation
North Metro Corridor
January 2011 ES-10
FIGURE ES-3. INITIAL ALIGNMENTS CONSIDERED FOR THE NORTH METRO CORRIDOR
Final Environmental Impact Statement and Section 4(f) Evaluation
North Metro Corridor
ES-11 January 2011
ES.3.1 Alignment Alternatives
To fulfill the purpose of the North Metro corridor to provide service between DUS and the 162nd Avenue area, these initial alignment corridors were evaluated:
UP Railroad Alignment (which consists of the UP Greeley Subdivision to the UP Boulder Branch)
BNSF/UP Boulder Branch Railroad Alignment (which consists of the BNSF Brush Subdivision to the UP Boulder Branch)
Interstate 25 (I-25) Corridor
Washington Street Corridor (two options)
UP Greeley Subdivision from DUS to Brighton
The alignment lays the groundwork for the other components of the alternatives, which include technology and stations. The alignment and technology alternatives are described in Table ES-6.
TABLE ES-6. ALIGNMENT AND TECHNOLOGY ALTERNATIVES Alignment and Technology Alternatives No Action Alternative Transportation System Management/Travel Demand Management (TSM/TDM) Light Rail Transit (LRT) Technology
Paralleling UP Railroad (UP Greeley/UP Boulder Branch) on West Paralleling BNSF/UP Boulder Branch on West Paralleling UP Railroad Greeley Subdivision on East or West Paralleling Interstate-25 on West On Washington Street in Median On Washington Street in Median with Traffic Lane Reduction
Diesel Multiple Unit (DMU) Technology UP Alignment (UP Greeley/UP Boulder Branch) BNSF/UP Boulder Branch UP Railroad Greeley
Electric Multiple Unit (EMU) Technology UP Alignment (UP Greeley/UP Boulder Branch) BNSF/UP Boulder Branch UP Railroad Greeley
Other Alternatives Locomotive Hauled Coaches Bus Rapid Transit Streetcar Monorail Subway Third Rail Double-decker DMU or EMU East to West Connections Roadway East to West Circumferential Commuter Rail Quebec Street
Source: North Metro Corridor Project Team, 2008. Note: UP = Union Pacific
Final Environmental Impact Statement and Section 4(f) Evaluation
North Metro Corridor
January 2011 ES-12
ES.3.1.1 Additional Options for Sand Creek Junction in the Southern Section
Early in the project, RTD identified a need to bypass a heavily congested railroad junction where the UP Railroad and BNSF Railway lines cross each other at-grade in the Southern Section of the corridor. The BNSF Railway and UP Railroad cross over Sand Creek and under I-270 at a very constrained area known as Sand Creek Junction. RTD considered a number of alignment options for going over or through Sand Creek Junction or bypassing it to the west or east. These alignment options and sub-options included Alignment A, going through, over, or near the junction; Alignments B, C, and D, bypassing to the west side of Sand Creek Junction (also referred to as the cross-country alignments); and Alignments E and F, bypassing to the east side (see Figure ES-4 for the main options).
ES.3.1.2 Technology Alternatives
The UP Railroad Company has formally documented that vehicles that do not meet Federal Railroad Administration (FRA) compliance standards for vehicle safety would not be allowed to operate alongside freight rail vehicles within a shared ROW without a separation distance in excess of 50 feet, large barrier walls, or temporal separation. The BNSF Railway Company has provided no formal statement but has implied a similar policy.
Light rail transit (LRT) technology does not comply with FRA vehicle safety standards, and with the position of each of the railroad companies, LRT cannot be implemented within these freight railroad corridors. As a result, the FRA-compliant commuter rail technologies that were considered for the railroad alignment alternatives are diesel multiple unit (DMU) and electric multiple unit (EMU). Therefore, LRT technology was only considered along separate alignments or parallel to freight railroad ROW.
During the conceptual alternatives process of the North Metro study, appropriate transit technology alternatives were matched with the alignments. LRT was considered for all the alignments, but DMU and EMU were only considered applicable to the UP Boulder Branch, the BNSF/UP Boulder Branch, and the UP Railroad Greeley rail corridors. The DMU and EMU vehicle technologies were not considered along the I-25 or Washington Street corridors due to the vehicles’ geometric limitations in operating along those roadway corridors, and because the introduction of a heavier rail technology is not compatible with traffic when LRT is the standard application.
The resulting initial conceptual alternatives are shown in Table ES-6. These technology alternatives were evaluated using two levels of screening. Level 1 screening involved a fatal flaw analysis, and Level 2 screening provided an expanded conceptual screening step to determine key tradeoffs related to project goals. At the conclusion of Level 2 screening, commuter rail was selected over all other transit technologies, and the DMU and EMU vehicle technologies continued to be evaluated in the DEIS.
Final Environmental Impact Statement and Section 4(f) Evaluation
North Metro Corridor
ES-13 January 2011
FIGURE ES-4. SOUTHERN SECTION ALIGNMENTS TO COMMERCE CITY
Source: North Metro Corridor Project Team, 2009.
Final Environmental Impact Statement and Section 4(f) Evaluation
North Metro Corridor
January 2011 ES-14
ES.3.1.3 Station Locations
The North Metro corridor has eight station target areas. The station target areas were selected because they fit within communities that could provide sufficient ridership, support local plans, and possibly help fulfill future transit oriented development (TOD) plans around the station sites. It is desirable for rail stations to be approximately 2 miles apart, on average. The recommended stations are described in Section ES.3.6.3, Stations. Through a series of station planning meetings, municipal representatives and the general public were included in the station development and evaluation process.
ES.3.2 How Were the Alignment and Technology Alternatives Evaluated?
The evaluation process initially included three levels of screening with the intent to select the most feasible alignment(s), vehicle technology, and station options for further analysis in the DEIS. Two subsequent screening levels (Level 4 and Level 5) were added to address unique issues that were introduced during the study process. Each screening level was formalized with milestone meetings for the public, the LGT, and the AWG.
ES.3.2.1 Alternatives Evaluation Screening Criteria
The specific alternatives evaluation screening criteria are presented in Table ES-7.
TABLE ES-7. ALTERNATIVES EVALUATION CRITERIA AT EACH LEVEL OF SCREENING Screening Level Criteria Goal/Focus
Level 1 (Fatal Flaw)
Does the alternative concept meet the project Purpose?
Does the alternative concept meet the project Need?
Screen initial list of alignment alternatives and vehicle technologies. Evaluate station target areas.
Level 2 (Conceptual) Fulfillment of Purpose and Need at Level 1.
Mobility improvements.
Affordability/cost effectiveness.
Environmental impacts.
Community impacts/benefits.
Compatibility with related plans.
Degree of community support.
Degree of agency support.
Screen refined list of alignment alternatives and technologies.
Level 3 (Preliminary Evaluation)
Fulfillment of Purpose and Need at Level 1 and Level 2.
Cost/affordability.
Technical feasibility/compatibility.
Mobility improvements.
Environmental impacts.
Transit supportive of land use and future travel patterns.
Compatibility with related projects.
Degree of community support.
Degree of agency support.
Evaluate the BNSF Railway and UP Railroad alignments from DUS to 84th Avenue; evaluate cross-country and other Southern Section alignments A through F and evaluate all station options. Evaluate DMU and EMU vehicle technologies.
Final Environmental Impact Statement and Section 4(f) Evaluation
North Metro Corridor
ES-15 January 2011
TABLE ES-7. ALTERNATIVES EVALUATION CRITERIA AT EACH LEVEL OF SCREENING Screening Level Criteria Goal/Focus
Level 4 (Southern Section Cross-Country Alignments)
Same as Level 3 criteria.
Additional criteria specific to Level 4 including residential and/or business impacts.
Further evaluate cross-country alignments, B-1 through B-4; further evaluate station options. Evaluate DMU and EMU vehicle technologies.
Level 5 (Re-evaluation of Southern Section BNSF Railway and UP Railroad Alignments)
Mobility improvements.
Guideway costs.
Railroad ROW impacts.
ROW/property impacts.
Environmental justice impacts.
Degree of community support.
Degree of agency support.
Re-evaluate the BNSF Railway and UP Railroad alignments from DUS in the Southern Section, due to higher costs than anticipated in negotiations between RTD and UP Railroad in January 2008; due to costs and changes in technology; re-evaluate the previously screened-out BNSF Alignment A, and evaluate newer iterations of the A alignments introduced in May 2009, alignments A-2 and A-3; evaluate BNSF station options; evaluate modified/refined station options in remainder of corridor. Evaluate DMU and EMU vehicle technologies.
Source: North Metro Corridor Project Team, 2009.
Notes:
DMU = diesel multiple unit
DUS = Denver Union Station
EMU = electric multiple unit
ROW = right-of-way
RTD = Regional Transportation District
UP = Union Pacific
Another key discriminator included within the environmental impacts criteria at each level is an assessment as to whether an alternative would be the Least Environmentally Damaging Practicable Alternative for aquatic resources.
ES.3.2.2 Summary of Alternatives Evaluated in the DEIS
The No Action Alternative was advanced through all levels of screening, and was fully evaluated in the DEIS as required by NEPA. The Build Alternative that was evaluated in the DEIS included multiple options for alignments in the Southern Section, as well as options for vehicle technologies, and stations.
The alignment alternative advanced to the DEIS was the modified BNSF outside the BNSF Brush Subdivision ROW from DUS to Sand Creek Junction and the UP Boulder Branch Alignment north of Sand Creek Junction (this alternative is henceforth referred to as the BNSF/UP Boulder Branch Alternative). It begins at DUS in the Southern Section, runs adjacent to the BNSF Brush Subdivision, and would use one of the four alignment options to avoid Sand Creek Junction before connecting to the UP Boulder Branch in Commerce City. The four alignment options in the Southern Section were further analyzed in the DEIS as well, and included A-3, B-2, B-3, and B-4. With respect to the vehicle technology, EMU and DMU were evaluated in the DEIS.
Final Environmental Impact Statement and Section 4(f) Evaluation
North Metro Corridor
January 2011 ES-16
ES.3.2.3 Summary of Screening Results and DEIS Evaluation
The overall screening process is illustrated in Figure ES-5. The graphic shows the segments of the corridor that were addressed at each screening level in the alternatives analysis. The process for evaluating stations and technologies is also noted.
The DEIS evaluation identified many trade-offs among the Southern Section alignment options (A-3, B-2, B-3, and B-4), but did not select a Preferred Alternative. Subsequent to the release of the DEIS, RTD received input from local jurisdictions, stakeholders, and the public. Based on this input, RTD recommended the B-2 alignment as an element of the Preferred Alternative because it has fewer environmental and community impacts than B-3 and B-4, provides a safer route past the Suncor Energy (U.S.A.) Inc. refinery than A-3, and has no identified conflicts with railroad operations compared to the other alternatives.
The evaluation of vehicle technology indicated that both EMU and DMU meet the Purpose and Need of the North Metro Corridor Project, and although EMU costs more up-front than DMU primarily due to electrification, it’s payback time – the number of years that it takes for its lower O/M costs to offset its higher up-front costs – results in lower total costs over the life of the vehicles. EMU technology also interfaces well with the other RTD commuter rail corridors, has fewer adverse community impacts in terms of air quality and noise, and more support among the community and participating agencies. Therefore, EMU was recommended over DMU as the preferred vehicle technology in the DEIS.
As detailed in Section 2.2.4.2, Station Screening, RTD recommended a preferred station option in the DEIS at all but the Denver station target area. A recommendation for the Denver station was made subsequent to the DEIS based on input from CCD, stakeholders, and the public, and is discussed in Section 2.2.4.2. Each station option was further refined in the FEIS to reduce impacts, in response to stakeholder comments. The station options are illustrated in Chapter 2, Figures 2-15 through 2-22.
Final Environmental Impact Statement and Section 4(f) Evaluation
North Metro Corridor
ES-17 January 2011
FIGURE ES-5. ALTERNATIVES SCREENING PROCESS
Source: North Metro Corridor Project Team, 2010.
Final Environmental Impact Statement and Section 4(f) Evaluation
North Metro Corridor
January 2011 ES-18
ES.3.3 Station Screening
As shown on Table ES-7, criteria were developed for each level of screening and endorsed through the agency and public involvement process. Each level of screening was considered a project milestone. At each project milestone, input was solicited from local governments, agencies, and the public. This input was used to refine the alternatives at each level.
ES.3.3.1 Station Evaluation Screening Criteria
Initially, more than four dozen station options were suggested for the eight station target areas in the corridor. Station screening occurred during levels 3, 4, and 5 evaluations. Specific criteria were used for the station screening, as with the alignment screening, with increasing detail as the evaluations progressed. Station screening criteria included the following six categories:
1. Mobility (ridership, parking demand, and access needs)
2. Operational (track alignment compatibility)
3. Site Configuration (accommodation of parking/facility needs)
4. Community (demographics, interests, and compatibility)
5. Economic (existing businesses and future development)
6. Environmental (sensitivity of resources)
During the station screening, certain key discriminators became apparent from the results of the evaluation. These discriminators aided the project team’s decisions to set aside or advance station options to the DEIS for detailed analysis. These key discriminators included:
Ridership Potential – Projected demand and nearby future population and employment.
Parking – Initial and future demand, and opportunities to accommodate supply.
Access – Parking, transit, and pedestrian/bicycle.
ROW – Property acquisition and economic and business impacts.
Community Acceptance – Agency and public concerns or support.
Environmental Considerations – Hazardous material site impacts, and impacts to sensitive environmental and community resources, such as parks and trails, cultural/historic properties, aquatic/wetland areas, and effects from noise.
ES.3.3.2 Results from the Station Screening Process
Of the more than four dozen station options for the eight station target areas, 15 station options were advanced to the DEIS for further evaluation. These options and their recommendations are listed above in Table ES-2. The station names were simplified for the FEIS.
ES.3.4 What Are the Alternatives Presented in the FEIS?
The following alternatives are analyzed in this FEIS:
No Action Alternative
Preferred Alternative: EMU on the BNSF/UP Boulder Branch Alignment
Final Environmental Impact Statement and Section 4(f) Evaluation
North Metro Corridor
ES-19 January 2011
Each of these is described in more detail below.
ES.3.5 What Is the No Action Alternative?
The No Action Alternative provides a base of comparison for determining the impacts of project alternatives. It does not mean that no improvements occur. The No Action Alternative includes existing projects and financially committed projects to respond to the expected growth in the North Metro corridor study area to the year 2035. These projects would be completed with or without implementation of the North Metro corridor Preferred Alternative. By accounting for other projects to be built in a corridor or study area, the No Action Alternative provides the benchmark from which the Preferred Alternative is evaluated. Both transit and highway projects are part of the No Action Alternative.
ES.3.5.1 Transit Projects
The No Action Alternative includes existing transit service and facilities inside the North Metro corridor study area and committed improvements, including improved bus service and facilities, identified in the Denver Regional Council of Government’s (DRCOG) Metro Vision 2035 Regional Transportation Plan (Metro Vision 2035 Plan) (DRCOG 2010). It also includes the entire FasTracks Plan (RTD 2004) except for the North Metro Corridor Project.
ES.3.5.2 Highway Projects
The No Action Alternative roadway network in the region, including within the North Metro corridor study area, is assumed to be the roadway projects included in the DRCOG Metro Vision 2035 Plan (2010), the 2008-2013 Transportation Improvement Program (2009), and the local jurisdiction’s Capital Improvement Programs. A complete list of these roadway improvements is included in Chapter 2, Alternatives Considered.
ES.3.6 What Is the Preferred Alternative?
The alignment, technology, station, and service elements of the Preferred Alternative are described below. The transit and highway projects described in the No Action Alternative are also part of the Preferred Alternative.
ES.3.6.1 Proposed Alignment
For evaluation purposes, the corridor was divided into two sections. The Southern Section covers the area from the DUS access to 84th Avenue. The Northern Section continues from 84th Avenue to the terminus, the 162nd Avenue area. Figure ES-6 through Figure ES-8 provide detailed maps of the Preferred Alternative.
The Preferred Alternative alignment generally follows the BNSF Brush Subdivision to UP Boulder Branch between DUS and the 162nd Avenue area, a distance of approximately 18 miles. This is referred to as the BNSF/UP Boulder Branch Alternative. The southern terminus is at the DUS access point (at approximately 20th Street), and the northern terminus is the 162nd Avenue area in Thornton. The Preferred Alternative is located adjacent to and just east of the BNSF mainline (Brush Subdivision) in Denver. In Commerce City, the Preferred Alternative crosses over the BNSF mainline and is generally adjacent to the O’Brian Canal through private commercial and industrial parcels in what is referred to as the “cross-country area.” (The Preferred Alternative follows what had been described in the DEIS as alignment option B-2 in the Southern Section.) The alignment connects with the UP Boulder Branch ROW near West 70th Avenue. North of Commerce City, the Preferred Alternative remains within the UP Boulder Branch ROW, which was purchased by RTD in 2009.
Final Environmental Impact Statement and Section 4(f) Evaluation
North Metro Corridor
January 2011 ES-20
FIGURE ES-6. PREFERRED ALTERNATIVE DETAIL — DUS ACCESS TO 74TH AVENUE
Final Environmental Impact Statement and Section 4(f) Evaluation
North Metro Corridor
ES-21 January 2011
FIGURE ES-7. PREFERRED ALTERNATIVE DETAIL — 74TH AVENUE TO 120TH AVENUE
Final Environmental Impact Statement and Section 4(f) Evaluation
North Metro Corridor
January 2011 ES-22
FIGURE ES-8. PREFERRED ALTERNATIVE DETAIL — 120TH AVENUE AREA TO 162ND AVENUE AREA
Final Environmental Impact Statement and Section 4(f) Evaluation
North Metro Corridor
ES-23 January 2011
The majority of the alignment is single-track, with passing track segments in five locations: between DUS and 38th Street; between south of 72nd Avenue and just north of I-76; between north of Thornton Parkway and just north of 104th Avenue; between south of 124th Avenue and south of York Street; and between SH 7 and the end of line – approximately 162nd Avenue. The second track in these locations allows trains in two directions to pass without delay, thus maintaining the peak period service plan for 15 minute headways between DUS and the SH 7/162nd Avenue Station. The typical trackway section is shown in Figure ES-9.
FIGURE ES-9. COMMUTER RAIL TYPICAL TRACKWAY (TANGENT SECTION)
Source: North Metro Corridor Project Team, 2010.
ES.3.6.2 Proposed Technology
As a result of the DEIS analysis, EMU was selected as the preferred commuter rail vehicle technology for the North Metro Corridor Project. This was primarily due to cost effectiveness when considering total fleet requirements and operating costs over a long-term horizon. The EMU vehicles require electrification of the tracks by an overhead contact system (commonly called an “overhead catenary system”) along the corridor to provide power. It is anticipated that RTD would locate an electric substation for all EMU technology in the Gold Line corridor or the East corridor. The two autotransformers required by North Metro for power would be located within properties identified to be acquired for either a station or the alignment, and impacts
Final Environmental Impact Statement and Section 4(f) Evaluation
North Metro Corridor
January 2011 ES-24
would be contained therein. Representative locations have been identified as at the 88th Avenue Station and within the UP Boulder Branch ROW north of 136th Avenue.
ES.3.6.3 Stations
In addition to the existing Denver Union Station in lower downtown, there are eight proposed stations in the North Metro corridor. Two stations are located in the Southern Section, while the remaining six stations are located in the Northern Section. The Southern Section stations are the National Western Stock Show Station in Denver and the 72nd Avenue Station in Commerce City. The Northern Section stations from south to north are the 88th Avenue Station and 104th Avenue Station in Thornton, the 112th Station in Northglenn, and the 124th Avenue Station, 144th Avenue Station, and SH7/162nd Avenue Station in Thornton. Table ES-2 above lists station target areas, station options from the DEIS, and the recommended stations in the FEIS.
ES.3.6.4 Proposed Train Service
Service would generally be provided from 5 a.m. (morning) to 11:30 p.m. on weekdays; Friday and Saturday night service would extend to 1:30 a.m. Base headways (time between trains) would be 30 minutes with 15 minute headways during weekday peak commuting hours. Weekends and holidays would be more limited than weekday service. Travel time would be 32 minutes between DUS and 162nd Avenue, with 24,500 riders per weekday (2035).
A mid-day layover track would be provided in the Southern Section near 31st Street. This facility would primarily be used to store trains between the weekday morning and afternoon peak periods, and for emergencies. It would not typically be used for overnight storage or for maintenance. A tail track would be provided north of the SH 7/162nd Avenue Station to stage trains preparing to head south or for emergencies.
ES.3.6.5 Commuter Rail Maintenance Facility
The Preferred Alternative must also access RTD’s Commuter Rail Maintenance Facility (CRMF) at the Fox North site. The North Metro corridor, Gold Line, East corridor, and Northwest Rail trains would use the same maintenance facility. The North Metro trains would need to travel to the CRMF for overnight storage and maintenance, which is approximately 2.5 miles from DUS. The Fox North Site is adjacent to railroad ROW that would serve the future Gold Line and Northwest Rail commuter rail corridors. The UP Railroad north yard and the BNSF Railway trailer-on-flatcar yard are west of the proposed CRMF site, and an Owens Corning manufacturing facility is on the north. The CRMF site was evaluated in the CRMF Supplemental Environmental Assessment to FasTracks Commuter Rail Corridors (FTA and RTD 2009) which serves as a supplement for the Gold Line DEIS (FTA 2008) and East Corridor DEIS (FTA 2009a).
The CRMF was subsequently included in the Gold Line Corridor FEIS (FTA 2009b) and East Corridor FEIS and Section 4(f) Evaluation (FTA 2009c). In November 2009, a ROD was issued for both these projects which included the CRMF. The CRMF would include a maintenance shop, EMU rail storage yard, DMU rail storage yard, employee facilities, administrative offices, employee parking facilities, a maintenance-of-way building, and a lay-down yard. The operation of the CRMF would be ongoing 24 hours per day, 7 days per week.
Final Environmental Impact Statement and Section 4(f) Evaluation
North Metro Corridor
ES-25 January 2011
ES.3.7 Cost and Financing
North Metro’s capital costs for the year of expenditure dollars for 2020 and 2035 for the Preferred Alternative are estimated to cost $910 million for the initial project in 2020 (2010 Annual Program Evaluation), with an additional $150 million for parking and platform expansion and additional vehicles in 2035. A Transportation Infrastructure Finance and Innovation Act of 1998 loan is a portion of the current concept for financing the North Metro corridor, along with additional funding from other sources, such as the Railroad Rehabilitation and Improvement Financing Program and the FTA’s New Starts Funding Program.
ES.4 AFFECTED ENVIRONMENT AND ENVIRONMENTAL CONSEQUENCES
ES.4.1 What Human or Environmental Resources Were Considered?
Key resources and human or environmental conditions that were evaluated in the FEIS are listed in Table ES-8. The impacts of the Preferred Alternative that have proven to be of greatest concern to the public are discussed in more detail below.
TABLE ES-8. RESOURCES EVALUATED IN THE NORTH METRO CORRIDOR FEIS Resources Evaluated
Social Impacts Air Quality and Energy
Environmental Justice Noise and Vibration
Land Use Biological Resources
Economic Mineral Resources
Farmlands Water Quality and Floodplains
Land Acquisition Wetlands
Archaeological, Historic and Paleontological Resources Hazardous Materials
Visual Resources Utilities
Parklands and Open Space Public Safety and Security
Source: North Metro Corridor Project Team, 2009.
Note:
FEIS = Final Environmental Impact Statement
Impacts have been minimized because the majority of the project would be located in a railroad ROW with the exception of the alignment in the Southern Section and at station locations. In addition, significant public input identified concerns and allowed the team to address, avoid, or minimize these concerns through the design process.
ES.4.2 What Kinds of Environmental Effects Would the Project Have?
The predicted impacts of the Preferred Alternative are discussed below for resources identified as of greatest concern to the public and agencies. A summary of all the impacts and proposed mitigation measures associated with the implementation of the Preferred Alternative is provided in Table ES-10 at the end of the Executive Summary.
Final Environmental Impact Statement and Section 4(f) Evaluation
North Metro Corridor
January 2011 ES-26
ES.4.2.1 Social Impacts and Environmental Justice
The Preferred Alternative would increase mobility and access to community facilities throughout the North Metro corridor study area. Introducing a new commuter rail alignment to avoid the Sand Creek Junction area would not cause a barrier effect, since the alignment would closely follow the O’Brian Canal, which currently acts as a barrier. Farther north, the existing UP Railroad ROW separates neighborhoods and existing social trails cross the UP Railroad ROW. Use of the alignment for commuter rail would eliminate the social trails across the rail corridor between the neighborhoods and could affect community cohesion, especially in newer neighborhoods. To maintain connections, pedestrian crossings of the alignment would be provided at formal street crossings, as well as at new grade-separated overpasses at 104th Avenue and 120th Avenue, at some station platforms, and at proposed trail underpass crossings for Fernald Trail in Commerce City and the Rocky Top Middle School connector in Thornton. No community facilities would be displaced.
Environmental justice regulations were created because of concerns that land uses and facilities were being placed in minority and low-income communities without regard to the consequences of these actions. Therefore, projects are evaluated to assess if there are disproportionate impacts to minority and low-income communities as compared to the general population. The evaluation for North Metro did not find any disproportionate impacts; however, there would be some additional benefits to these communities.
One of the needs of the project is to serve traditional transit users, who include elderly, minority, and low-income populations that are dependent on public transportation because they do not own, or prefer not to use, private vehicles. There would be benefits to minority and low-income populations from implementing the Preferred Alternative because of increased mobility and access to transit including the North Metro commuter rail line as well as the FasTracks system. Indirect benefits would result from better access to jobs and services through the transit system and potential TOD-related job creation.
ES.4.2.2 Land Use, Zoning, and Economic Considerations
The Preferred Alternative would be compatible with and would support regional and local plans. Land use changes are expected as a result of induced development (TOD and other mixed-use). TOD advantages include more compact development, more cost-effective infrastructure investment, less automobile dependency and congestion, and improved air quality. Such land use policies also improve the performance of the transit system through increased ridership and revenues.
All of the local governments in the North Metro corridor study area have prepared plans, or are in the process of preparing plans, to take advantage of the benefits of the Preferred Alternative. The impact analysis concludes that the Preferred Alternative would be both compatible with and supportive of existing and future land use and transportation planning within the North Metro corridor study area.
The Preferred Alternative would impact six businesses that have been identified to require relocation. These impacts would affect approximately 352 employees. This number of relocations counts exclusively businesses, which is distinct from the total properties identified for relocation.
Final Environmental Impact Statement and Section 4(f) Evaluation
North Metro Corridor
ES-27 January 2011
Construction of the Preferred Alternative, however, would result in the creation of an estimated 4,680 construction-related jobs per year (2,750 direct and 1,930 indirect) during the construction period estimated at 3 years. The Preferred Alternative, overall, would have a minor measurable effect on the jobs/housing balance as it may result from TOD plans at station areas in the Northern Section of the Preferred Alternative.
Overall, the assessed valuation of impacted parcels, including the assessed valuation of parcels with tax-exempt status, of the Preferred Alternative (from the alignment and stations), is $5,081,177. In the long-term, changes in these assessed values would be offset by the anticipated TOD. Changes in taxable retail sales from development in the Preferred Alternative are anticipated to result from changes in retail development within the corridor resulting from TOD. The retail development changes anticipated from the Preferred Alternative are largely limited to changes in the development plans surrounding stations as a result of TOD opportunities. Four stations with TOD plans anticipate an increase in retail development, among other land uses: the 88th Avenue, 124th Avenue/Eastlake, 144th Avenue, and SH 7/162nd Avenue stations.
ES.4.2.3 Land Acquisition, Displacements, and Relocation of Existing Uses
Land acquisition has been one of the top concerns throughout the public involvement process of the EIS. Implementation of the Preferred Alternative would require acquisition of 121.68 acres. The acquisitions would be for the areas of the alignment outside of the railroad ROW, proposed stations, and mitigation measures, such as improved drainage or station access. Total acquisition acreage in the Southern Section would be 46.38 acres for the alignment and 17.03 acres for the two stations, with four business relocations and one relocation of an exempt property. The Preferred Alternative in the Southern Section would require easements from the BNSF Railway. It would also require the rebuilding of Brighton Boulevard, south of York Street; however, this property would not be acquired by RTD.
In the Northern Section, the alignment would require the acquisition of 9.02 acres, including the relocation of one residential and one business property. The proposed stations would require the acquisition of 49.25 acres and the relocation of one business. The impacts for the alignment in the Northern Section would generally be small, sliver impacts because RTD purchased the UP Boulder Industrial Lead (UP Boulder Branch) in 2009.
In addition to property acquisition, impacts to business operations at several sites were identified. RTD will continue to work with these affected businesses to minimize or mitigate for these impacts.
ES.4.2.4 Archaeological, Historic, and Paleontological Resources
Cultural resources (archaeological and historic resources) are regulated through Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act (Public Law 89-665, 15 October 1966; 16 United States Code 470 et seq., as amended through 2006) and the Archeological and Historic Preservation Act. Historic properties are defined at 36 CFR 800.16(l)(1) as “any prehistoric or historic district, site, building, structure, or object included in, or eligible for inclusion in, the National Register of Historic Places [NRHP].”
The potential for impacts to historic and archaeological resources is important to the North Metro corridor study area stakeholders. The FEIS analysis indicates that the Preferred
Final Environmental Impact Statement and Section 4(f) Evaluation
North Metro Corridor
January 2011 ES-28
Alternative would result in adverse impacts to one historic site and two archaeological sites. These sites are as follows:
Quimby Railroad Stop (5AM2111).
Eastlake Railroad Stop (5AM2114)
Historic Farmstead (5AM2158)
ES.4.2.5 Visual and Aesthetic Qualities
The visual impact of the North Metro Corridor Project has been a concern identified in the public involvement process, especially with respect to the noise walls and overpasses.
Implementation of the Preferred Alternative would involve the installation of the following elements that would change the visual quality in the corridor:
Eight transit stations and park-n-Ride facilities, including five parking structures in the 2035 horizon year
Noise barriers and corridor fencing
More than 18 miles of overhead catenary systems and trackway
Overpasses at 104th Avenue and 120th Avenue
All of these features would represent a visual change, with the degree of change dependent on the surrounding environment at specific locations.
ES.4.2.6 Parklands and Recreation Areas
There are over 100 private and public parks and recreational resources located within the North Metro corridor study area, and more than 60 resources (existing and proposed) within the project study area. Project team members coordinated with CCD, Adams County, Commerce City, City of Northglenn, City of Thornton, and the Greenway Foundation in a series of meetings to discuss identification, impacts, and mitigation measures for these resources. The Preferred Alternative would directly impact eight parks/open space areas and 13 recreational trails/multi-use paths. Parks and open space impacts generally include relatively small areas along the margin of the property that through mitigation commitments would not affect the continued use and function of these facilities or diminish the recreational opportunities. Impacts to Globeville Landing Park would affect the frisbee golf course and require the removal of trees along the commuter rail alignment. The impacts would be mitigated through funding for master planning and replacement of trees as well as restoration of temporary impacts. Recreational trails and multi-use paths within the direct impact area would be realigned or incorporated into the design to maintain the continued use and function of these facilities. The regional trail access from the Fernald Trailhead and the Rocky Top Middle School Connector Trail would both cross the commuter rail alignment via new trail underpasses and the Signal Ditch Trail would be realigned to cross the alignment adjacent to 128th Avenue. Potential indirect impacts are also identified for several parkland resources including reduced visibility for trail users associated with new rail bridges; and increased use of resources due to increased access. Temporary construction activities could cause inconvenience to trail users passing through the project area, but recreational access would be maintained using measures such as walking structures or temporary detours.
Final Environmental Impact Statement and Section 4(f) Evaluation
North Metro Corridor
ES-29 January 2011
FIGURE ES-10. TYPICAL A-WEIGHTED SOUND LEVELS
Source: North Metro Corridor Project Team, 2010.
ES.4.2.7 Noise and Vibration
Noise is one of the principal environmental impacts associated with rail transit projects, and has been a key public concern throughout the North Metro corridor public involvement process. Figure ES-10 provides context for various types of noise levels.
For the Preferred Alternative in the design year (2035) without mitigation, there would be severe noise impacts predicted at one school plus 438 residences, and moderate impacts projected at 562 residences. The noise impacts are projected to be slightly less on opening day (2020), with 10 fewer severe impacts and 98 fewer moderate impacts. The impacts are predicted at residences within 50 to 940 feet from the proposed near track, depending on the direct impact area.
The proposed mitigation approach is to first establish “Quiet Zones” at all at-grade crossings of streets near affected noise-sensitive areas and then to construct noise barriers at those locations where residual severe and moderate noise impacts are reasonable to mitigate according to FTA and RTD policy. (See Figure ES-11 for a Quiet Zone explanation.) Based on this approach, a total of 16,500 feet of 8- to 12-foot-high noise barriers is recommended.
With the recommended Quiet Zone and noise barrier mitigation measures, it is predicted that 180 moderate impacts would remain and only one of these moderate impacts would be in the upper 50% of the impact range in the design year (2035). Based on detailed vibration analysis, no vibration impacts are projected for the Preferred Alternative; therefore, no mitigation is currently recommended.
ES.4.2.8 Natural Resources – Wetlands
Wetland and other water features are considered important resources by several relevant government agencies. The protection of these resources is critical for maintaining the physical, chemical, and biological integrity of aquatic resources in the United States (US). As a result, impacts to wetlands and the other waters are closely regulated. The loss of wetlands and the functional values they provide is a continuing problem in the US. The development of new linear transportation infrastructure projects has the potential to add to that loss. As a result, wetlands in the project study area are located, identified, and evaluated. Designs are then
Quiet Zone
A Quiet Zone is an area where crossings of the rail line include sufficient safety mechanisms, so that trains are no longer required to sound their horns when crossing. Quiet Zones need to be implemented by local government through approvals from the Public Utilities Commission (PUC), FRA, and the railroads. RTD can assist but cannot submit the application to implement a Quiet Zone. Quiet Zone construction is part of the project costs.
Source: North Metro Corridor Project Team, 2008.
FIGURE ES-11. QUIET ZONE
Final Environmental Impact Statement and Section 4(f) Evaluation
North Metro Corridor
January 2011 ES-30
assessed for the ability to avoid the wetlands completely, minimize impacts to them, or, as a last resort, mitigate the impacts.
The Preferred Alternative, if implemented, would directly and permanently impact 2.0 acres of wetlands (0.9 acres jurisdictional) and 2.0 acres of other water features (1.3 acres jurisdictional).
ES.4.2.9 Hazardous Materials
Properties with landfills or hazardous materials present could substantially affect the feasibility or overall cost of the project. Impacts can result from current or historic land uses or releases of hazardous substances (i.e., pesticides, volatile organic compounds, semi-volatile organic compounds, and heavy metals) or petroleum products (e.g., gasoline, diesel fuel, and lubricants). The presence of these materials can cause project delays and increased costs, particularly if they are not identified prior to construction. Hazardous material contamination would be avoided where possible, and adequate protective measures taken before, during, and after construction.
Multiple hazardous material sites were identified within the project study area. Generally, the most heavily contaminated areas extend from the DUS access to the Commerce City area. Fewer sites are present north of 84th Avenue. Direct impacts along the Preferred Alternative include 90 high-ranked sites within 500 feet of the alignment and roadway improvements, all but six of which are in the Southern Section. Temporary construction impacts could occur if hazardous materials are encountered during construction resulting in potential human health hazards and costs to remove. These potential impacts would be more prevalent in the Southern Section.
ES.4.2.10 Public Safety and Security
Based on historic experience, the proposed North Metro Corridor Project would have no effect on crime in the North Metro corridor study area. Crime at the transit stations or on the transit vehicles is expected to reflect the crime activity of the surrounding communities, which would be similar to the No Action Alternative.
Emergency plans for the North Metro rail line are developed in consultation with the Fire and Life Safety Committee, which will continue to address issues and develop detailed emergency plans. Fencing and barriers will prevent trespassing on the trackway.
During construction, traffic control plans will minimize potential impacts on emergency response times, and securing construction sites will minimize potential safety hazards at the site.
ES.4.2.11 Section 4(f)
Section 4(f) of the United States Department of Transportation Act of 1966, as amended and codified in Title 49 United States Code § 303, declares that “[i]t is the policy of the United States Government that special effort should be made to preserve the natural beauty of the countryside and public park and recreation lands, wildlife and waterfowl refuges, and historic sites.” Section 4(f) was enacted in response to a growing awareness and concern on the part of the public and its elected representatives of the encroachment of a growing transportation system on parklands and historic sites. Section 4(f) also states that transportation programs and projects that require the use of protected lands shall not be approved unless a determination is made that:
1. there is no feasible or prudent alternative to the use of land; and
2. the project or program includes all possible planning to minimize harm resulting from the use.
Final Environmental Impact Statement and Section 4(f) Evaluation
North Metro Corridor
ES-31 January 2011
The Preferred Alternative would result in a direct use of 26 Section 4(f) resources of which 22 are de minimis or minimal impacts. Mitigation for these sites was addressed under parks and archaeological and historic properties.
ES.5 TRANSPORTATION
In comparison to the No Action Alternative, the Preferred Alternative would affect future transit and roadway operations. No permanent or long-term impacts on freight operations or bicycle and pedestrian facilities are anticipated.
ES.5.1 What Impacts Would the Preferred Alternative Have on Transit?
The Preferred Alternative would result in improved transit service, travel time, and capacity. Figure ES-12 shows system-wide linked transit trips forecast for the No Action Alternative and the Preferred Alternative. Linked trips provide a comparison of the overall transit ridership impact on the entire system. The average weekday ridership for the Preferred Alternative would be 24,500 in 2035. The Preferred Alternative would generate approximately 12,880 more system-wide transit-linked trips than the No Action Alternative.
FIGURE ES-12. NORTH METRO CORRIDOR SYSTEM-WIDE DAILY LINKED TRANSIT TRIPS (2035)
Source: DRCOG, 2010.
As shown on Figure ES-13, the Preferred Alternative will provide the fastest peak period transit travel time, at 32 minutes, between SH 7 and DUS in 2035. Transit times for the No Action Alternative and the Transportation System Management alternative assume express bus service traveling on I-25 bus/high-occupancy vehicle lanes into DUS. The Preferred Alternative exhibits a 46 % improvement in travel time over the automobile, and a 36% improvement over bus transit times in the No Action Alternative. Highway automobile travel times remain similar among all alternatives due to travelers utilizing the best available travel routes, and travelers shifting from local streets to the highway system when more roadway capacity is made available.
Final Environmental Impact Statement and Section 4(f) Evaluation
North Metro Corridor
January 2011 ES-32
FIGURE ES-13. TRAVEL TIME COMPARISON 162ND AVENUE TO DENVER UNION STATION (2035)
Source: DRCOG, 2010.
Table ES-9 shows the impact to vehicle miles traveled (VMT), vehicle hours traveled (VHT), and vehicle hours of delay (VHD) of each alternative in the North Metro corridor study area and the Denver metropolitan region. These are measures of roadway travel demand, congestion, and delay, respectively. Delay measurements consider the difference between traveling at freeflow speeds (uncongested) versus the time it would take to travel the same distance under congested conditions.
TABLE ES-9. STUDY AREA VEHICLE MILES TRAVELED, VEHICLE HOURS TRAVELED, AND VEHICLE HOURS OF DELAY COMPARISON (AVERAGE WEEKDAY 2035)
Measurement
North Metro Corridor Study Area
No Action Alternative
Preferred Alternative
Reduction for Preferred Alternative Over the No
Action Alternative
Vehicle Miles Traveled (VMT) 10,682,380 10,640,210 -42,170
Vehicle Hours Traveled (VHT) 349,580 345,960 -3,620
Vehicle Hours Delayed (VHD) 95,230 92,700 -2,530
Source: DRCOG, 2010.
Note:
- = negative
Both regionally and in the North Metro corridor study area, the difference in VMT and VHT is just over 1% or less when comparing the No Action Alternative and Preferred Alternative. In the regional analysis, the Preferred Alternative shows a reduction over the No Action Alternative of approximately 170,000 VMT, indicating a reduction in overall travel throughout the region. Within the North Metro corridor, the change in VHD represents the greatest overall percentage change among congestion measures. Within the North Metro corridor study area, the estimated reduction in VHD provided by the Preferred Alternative over the No Action Alternative is 2,530 hours (2.7%).
Final Environmental Impact Statement and Section 4(f) Evaluation
North Metro Corridor
ES-33 January 2011
ES.5.2 What Roadway Impacts Would the Project Have?
Roadway congestion levels can have a prominent effect on travel times and the propensity of travelers to utilize transit. The tradeoffs between automobile and transit travel have been examined as part of this multi-modal transportation system. Due to disproportionate rates of the projected daily VHT and VMT between 2007 and 2035, congestion is expected to extend the peak hours and lower overall average speeds. Southern portions of the North Metro corridor generate a greater degree of truck traffic due to industrial land uses and freight container transfers that occur between railroad cars and trucks. Although these roadway conditions are present in the corridor, the majority of roadway impacts from the Preferred Alternative for the North Metro Corridor Project are anticipated to be centered at the station access points and adjacent intersections. It is anticipated that some intersections would be affected by the traffic at the eight stations or the rail crossings and require mitigation. Mitigation will include the addition of signals, turn lanes, minor lane widening at intersection approaches/departures, modifying access at existing intersections, or in some cases, a combination of these elements.
ES.5.3 What Railroad/Roadway Crossing Improvements Would Be Made?
Rail crossing treatments have been proposed for the Preferred Alternative at-grade crossings based on RTD’s Grade Crossing Evaluation Methodology (2006), and to support the requirements for implementing Quiet Zones. As a result, the Preferred Alternative would incorporate 14 at-grade crossing improvement projects in the North Metro corridor study area. These mitigation measures will generally provide lights and dual gates. In some locations, intersections near crossings will need improvements. In addition, two grade-separated crossings have been proposed at 104th Avenue and 120th Avenue, where at-grade crossings exist today.
ES.5.4 What Are the Impacts to Freight Rail Operations?
The Preferred Alternative would allow for shared use of tracks for freight rail and commuter rail operations between slightly north of 70th Avenue and slightly south of 120th Avenue. RTD executed an agreement with the UP Railroad Company in 2009 allowing for this shared freight operation. To serve an existing customer in this section, deliveries to the freight rail customer would occur at night when the commuter rail is not operating. In the section south of 70th Avenue, track would not be shared with freight rail operations; therefore, there would be no impacts on freight rail operations that could not be mitigated.
As part of the North Metro corridor Preferred Alternative, commuter rail vehicles would be maintained at RTD’s proposed CRMF Fox North Site. Access to the CRMF site for North Metro corridor vehicles would be via the shared mainline tracks for the proposed FasTracks Gold Line/Northwest Rail commuter rail lines. There would be no impact to freight rail operations related to CRMF access.
ES.6 PUBLIC COMMENT AND AGENCY COORDINATION
A Public Involvement Program (PIP) and Corridor Coordination Plan (CCP) (as required by the Safe, Accountable, Flexible and Efficient Transportation Equity Act – A Legacy for Users [SAFETEA-LU], 2005) were developed and implemented for the North Metro Corridor Project. These plans blended ongoing engagement strategies with intense outreach organized around key project milestones.
Final Environmental Impact Statement and Section 4(f) Evaluation
North Metro Corridor
January 2011 ES-34
ES.6.1 How Has the Public Been Involved With This Project?
The public has been involved in the North Metro Corridor FEIS since the beginning of the project in September 2006 (Figure ES-14). Public workshops were held nine times at two locations in the corridor at SAFETEA-LU decision milestones, before the FEIS was released. Two public hearings were held upon the release of the DEIS.
FIGURE ES-14. COORDINATION PROCESS AND PROJECT SCHEDULE
Source: North Metro Corridor Project Team, 2010.
In addition, the PIP included community/issue forums, various stakeholder meetings, and station-specific meetings with numerous community, civic, neighborhood, and municipal committees and organizations. These small-group meetings engaged stakeholders in more community-specific ways than is possible with larger workshops. In order to give everyone ample opportunity to engage in the public process, outreach was also implemented specifically for minority and low-income communities.
ES.6.2 How Have Agencies Been Involved?
The Local Governments Team (LGT) and Agency Working Group (AWG) have been involved in the project from its inception. All project information was presented first to the LGT for review and input, then to the public through public workshops, and then to the combined LGT and AWG at agency milestone meetings. As outlined in the CCP, and agreed to by all participating and cooperating agencies, public involvement was organized as described below.
Final Environmental Impact Statement and Section 4(f) Evaluation
North Metro Corridor
ES-35 January 2011
ES.6.2.1 Local Governments Team
This is comprised of a “policy group” of one or two elected officials and a “technical group” of staff members chosen by each of the following local/regional government entities:
City of Brighton
Commerce City
CCD
City of Northglenn
City of Thornton
Adams County
DRCOG
ES.6.2.2 Agency Working Group
The AWG is comprised of the lead agency (FTA), LGT members (as participating agencies) and representatives from the following state and federal cooperating and participating agencies, and the railroads:
FTA
RTD (staff and board members)
United States Army Corps of Engineers (USACE)
Colorado Department of Transportation (CDOT)
United States Environmental Protection Agency
United States Fish and Wildlife Service
State Historic Preservation Officer (SHPO)
Colorado Department of Public Health and Environment
Colorado Division of Wildlife
Urban Drainage and Flood Control District
FHWA
FRA
BNSF Railway Company
UP Railroad Company
ES.6.3 How Can the Public Provide Effective Input to FTA and RTD?
Several options are available for contacting FTA and RTD. The North Metro Corridor project team will continue its proactive community engagement efforts through the completion of the FEIS and receipt of the FTA decision document. To provide information on the FEIS, the North Metro Corridor project team will disseminate information via the project website, e-mail blasts, and aggressive outreach to local media and conduct two public hearings.
Final Environmental Impact Statement and Section 4(f) Evaluation
North Metro Corridor
January 2011 ES-36
Comments related to the FEIS will be accepted until 1 March 2011. Comments can be submitted verbally or in writing. Verbal comments will only be accepted at the two public hearings. Written comments can be submitted via the following methods:
Online at www.RTD-FasTracks.com - - click on North Metro Corridor
E-mail to [email protected]
Mail information requests and comments to: David Beckhouse Federal Transit Administration (FTA), Region 8 c/o North Metro Project Team 999 18th Street, Suite 900 Denver, CO 80202
Submit comments via fax at 303-693-7738
Drop off at either of the two public hearings
Complete a comment form at either of the two public hearings
Comments received on the FEIS by 1 March 2011 will be responded to in the ROD.
ES.7 WHAT ARE THE REMAINING ISSUES TO BE RESOLVED?
As the project progresses into further design phases and the ROD, there are several key issues to be resolved, including:
Continue coordination with local governments, FRA, and the Public Utilities Commission to help facilitate implementation of Quiet Zone(s) in the project study area.
Ensure appropriate Americans with Disabilities design guidelines are used at station sites that meet FRA operational requirements.
Completed Phase II studies for hazardous materials. Additional studies may be required once final engineering design is underway.
Continue coordination with the railroads on operations.
Investigate safety issues regarding evacuation of commuter rail vehicles throughout the entire alignment. Continue coordination with local emergency responders on this subject and other safety issues, including crime prevention.
Continue coordination with CDOT regarding state highway ROW impacts and mitigation.
Continue coordination with CDOT on the I-70 East Project.
Continue coordination with affected property owners to avoid, minimize, or mitigate impacts.
Complete Section 106 Consultation with SHPO on finding of effect for the one remaining archaeological site.
Finalize the Memorandum of Agreement (MOA) between the SHPO, FTA, and RTD regarding adversely affected archeological sites or historic structures (draft MOA has been completed and is included in the FEIS).
Notify the Advisory Council on Historic Preservation (ACHP) of adverse effects for historic properties to provide an opportunity for their participating in the MOA.
Continue coordination with Colorado State Parks and National Park Service on Section 6(f).
Final Environmental Impact Statement and Section 4(f) Evaluation
North Metro Corridor
ES-37 January 2011
Coordinate with United States Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) on consultation requirements per Section 7 Environmental Species Act (ESA) and the requirements for the Platte River Recovery Implementation Plan.
Applied for 404(b)(1) Individual Permit from USACE.
Table ES-10 provides a summary of the impacts and proposed mitigation measures associated with the implementation of the Preferred Alternative.
Fin
al E
nviro
nm
enta
l Im
pact
Sta
tem
ent a
nd
Sec
tion
4(f)
Eva
luat
ion
No
rth
Me
tro
Co
rrid
or
Janu
ary
2011
E
S-3
8
TAB
LE E
S-10
. PR
OPO
SED
MIT
IGA
TIO
N M
EASU
RES
— E
LEM
ENTS
OF
THE
PREF
ERR
ED A
LTER
NA
TIVE
Im
pac
t Im
pac
t T
ype
Mit
igat
ion
Mea
sure
s
So
cial
Imp
acts
an
d E
nvi
ron
men
tal J
ust
ice
Com
mun
ity C
ohe
sion
and
S
afet
y at
Pe
dest
rian
Cro
ssin
gs
Con
stru
ctio
n an
d O
pera
tion
s
RT
D’s
pol
icy
is to
con
stru
ct a
fenc
e al
ong
the
entir
e ra
il lin
e to
det
er tr
espa
sser
s an
d in
cre
ase
safe
ty a
nd
secu
rity.
T
his
will
min
imiz
e th
e sa
fety
issu
es a
ssoc
iate
d w
ith p
edes
tria
ns,
espe
cial
ly c
hild
ren,
cro
ssin
g tr
acks
wh
ere
info
rmal
trai
ls
curr
ently
exi
st.
Mai
ntai
n e
xist
ing
gra
de-s
epar
ated
str
eet a
nd
trai
l cro
ssin
gs.
Pro
pose
d gr
ade
-se
para
ted
stre
et c
ross
ings
at
104
th A
venu
e an
d 1
20th
Ave
nue,
and
at t
he
Roc
ky T
op M
iddl
e S
cho
ol C
onn
ecto
r T
rail
ped
estr
ian
und
erpa
ss w
ill
prov
ide
optio
ns fo
r cr
ossi
ng th
e ra
ilro
ad tr
acks
saf
ely.
S
ee C
hapt
er 4
, T
rans
port
atio
n, f
or m
itiga
tion
spe
cific
to th
e nu
mer
ous
at-g
rade
cro
ssin
gs.
The
se m
easu
res
will
ma
inta
in p
edes
tria
n co
nnec
tions
and
com
mun
ity c
oh
esio
n.
Ove
rflo
w P
arki
ng in
N
eig
hbor
hoo
ds
Ope
ratio
ns a
nd
Des
ign
Coo
rdin
ate
with
loca
l jur
isdi
ctio
ns o
n a
park
ing
man
agem
ent
pro
gram
if in
form
al p
arki
ng d
ema
nd m
ater
ializ
es.
Tem
pora
ry C
ons
truc
tion
Impa
cts
(Inc
lud
ing
Tra
ffic
Con
gest
ion,
Noi
se, A
ir, a
nd
Vis
ual)
Con
stru
ctio
n
C
omm
unic
atio
n w
ith in
divi
dual
s, c
ompa
nies
, an
d co
mm
uniti
es th
roug
h di
vers
e m
edia
will
take
pla
ce to
adv
ertis
e th
e av
aila
bili
ty o
f tra
vel o
ptio
ns a
nd
serv
ices
.
A
n in
tern
et-b
ased
loca
l inf
orm
atio
n n
etw
ork
will
be
crea
ted
that
pro
vid
es p
rom
otio
ns; r
eal-
time
tran
sit i
nfor
mat
ion;
up
dat
es o
n co
nstr
uctio
n, r
oute
clo
sure
s, a
nd a
ltern
ativ
e ro
ute
info
rmat
ion;
and
oth
er tr
ansp
orta
tion
info
rmat
ion
and
se
rvic
es.
W
orki
ng w
ith th
e co
mm
uni
ties,
RT
D w
ill p
repa
re a
Con
stru
ctio
n M
anag
em
ent P
lan
that
spe
cifie
s pu
blic
com
mun
icat
ions
an
d co
nstr
uctio
n m
eans
and
met
hods
to r
ed
uce
or m
itig
ate
the
inco
nven
ienc
es o
f con
stru
ctio
n su
ch a
s n
oise
, dus
t, vi
sual
blig
ht, c
onst
ruct
ion
traf
fic, a
nd p
rese
rvat
ion
of a
cces
s to
hom
es, b
usi
ness
es, a
nd c
omm
unity
faci
litie
s.
R
TD
will
co
ordi
nate
with
impa
cted
nei
ghbo
rhoo
ds p
rior
to a
nd d
urin
g co
nstr
uctio
n ac
tiviti
es.
S
ee C
hap
ter
4, T
rans
port
atio
n.
S
ee S
ectio
n 3.
8, N
oise
and
Vib
ratio
n.
S
ee S
ectio
n 3.
7.1,
Air
Qua
lity.
S
ee S
ectio
n 3.
5, V
isua
l and
Aes
thet
ic Q
ualit
ies.
Sch
ool A
cces
s C
onst
ruct
ion
A S
choo
l Out
reac
h P
lan
for
the
cons
truc
tion
phas
e of
the
proj
ect
will
be
de
velo
ped
that
pro
vid
es a
n ov
ervi
ew
of
wh
at
loca
l sch
ools
can
exp
ect d
urin
g co
nstr
uctio
n, i
nclu
din
g sa
fe b
ehav
ior
in w
ork
zon
es, b
asic
saf
ety
mea
sure
s, a
nd a
te
ntat
ive
sch
edul
e of
con
stru
ctio
n ac
tiviti
es a
nd tr
affic
con
trol
mea
sure
s w
ith b
us, a
utom
obi
le, a
nd p
edes
tria
n de
tour
s.
Acq
uisi
tion
of R
esid
entia
l or
Bus
ines
s P
rop
erty
in S
outh
ern
Sec
tion
Con
stru
ctio
n
A
cqui
sitio
n a
nd r
eloc
atio
n as
sist
ance
, con
sist
ent
with
the
Un
iform
Act
, w
ill b
e pr
ovid
ed.
R
TD
will
pro
vid
e fr
ee, 1
-yea
r tr
ansi
t pas
ses
to a
ll h
ouse
hold
mem
bers
of l
ow
-inc
ome
and
min
ority
res
ide
ntia
l hou
seho
lds
that
are
acq
uire
d an
d re
loca
ted.
A
n in
form
atio
nal
mee
ting
will
be
held
for
busi
ness
es b
eing
rel
ocat
ed.
The
mee
ting
will
pro
vid
e an
intr
oduc
tion
and
ov
ervi
ew
of t
he p
roce
ss a
ssoc
iate
d w
ith th
e U
nifo
rm A
ct, a
s w
ell
as in
form
atio
n o
n av
aila
ble
reso
urce
s.
F
inal
Env
iron
men
tal I
mpa
ct S
tate
men
t an
d S
ectio
n 4(
f) E
valu
atio
n
No
rth
Me
tro
Co
rrid
or
E
S-3
9 Ja
nuar
y 20
11
TAB
LE E
S-10
. PR
OPO
SED
MIT
IGA
TIO
N M
EASU
RES
— E
LEM
ENTS
OF
THE
PREF
ERR
ED A
LTER
NA
TIVE
Im
pac
t Im
pac
t T
ype
Mit
igat
ion
Mea
sure
s
Con
stru
ctio
n-re
late
d Im
pact
s,
Suc
h as
No
ise,
Air
Qua
lity,
etc
. C
onst
ruct
ion
A C
onst
ruct
ion
Man
agem
ent
Pla
n w
ill b
e de
velo
ped
and
coor
dina
ted
with
affe
cted
ne
igh
borh
oods
(re
side
nts
and
busi
ness
es).
T
he p
lan
will
incl
ude
ele
me
nts
spec
ific
to c
omm
unic
atio
n o
n ro
ad c
losu
res,
air
qual
ity, n
oise
, vib
ratio
n,
wat
er q
ual
ity, h
azar
dou
s w
aste
con
trol
, vis
ua
l im
pact
s, n
oxi
ous
we
ed m
an
agem
ent,
arch
eolo
gica
l mo
nito
ring,
saf
ety,
se
curit
y, a
nd tr
affic
con
trol
. S
ee th
e sp
ecifi
c re
sour
ce s
ectio
ns o
f thi
s F
EIS
for
addi
tion
al d
etai
ls o
n m
itiga
tion
mea
sure
s.`
Lan
d U
se a
nd
Zo
nin
g
Lan
d U
se a
nd Z
onin
g
Non
e
N
one.
Eco
no
mic
Co
nsi
der
atio
ns
Impe
ded
Acc
ess
C
onst
ruct
ion
Con
stru
ctio
n m
ana
gem
ent
pla
ns w
ill b
e cr
eate
d an
d w
ork
with
loca
l com
mu
nitie
s w
ill ta
ke p
lace
.
A
ltern
ativ
e ro
utes
and
acc
ess
to p
rope
rtie
s af
fect
ed b
y co
nstr
uctio
n w
ill b
e pr
ovid
ed.
C
lear
sig
ns a
nd
dire
ctio
ns fo
r al
tern
ate
acce
ss p
oint
s w
ill b
e pr
ovid
ed.
C
oord
inat
ion
with
loca
l gro
ups
, nei
ghbo
rhoo
ds,
com
mun
ities
, and
juris
dict
ions
will
take
pla
ce.
N
ight
co
nstr
uctio
n to
acc
ele
rate
con
stru
ctio
n in
crit
ical
are
as w
ill b
e co
ndu
cted
.
T
empo
rary
acc
ess
durin
g n
orm
al b
usin
ess
hou
rs w
ill b
e pr
ovi
ded,
wh
ere
pos
sibl
e.
Pro
pert
y A
cqu
isiti
ons
Con
stru
ctio
n an
d O
pera
tion
s
Des
ign
mod
ifica
tion
will
be
used
to r
educ
e th
e nu
mb
er o
f pro
pert
y ac
qui
sitio
ns w
her
e pr
act
icab
le.
T
he a
cqui
sitio
n o
f rea
l pro
per
ty in
tere
sts
will
com
ply
fully
with
the
Uni
form
Act
and
the
Fift
h A
men
dmen
t of t
he U
S
Con
stitu
tion.
T
he U
nifo
rm A
ct a
pplie
s to
all
acq
uisi
tions
of r
eal p
rope
rty
or d
ispl
acem
ents
of p
eop
le r
esul
ting
from
fe
dera
l or
fede
rally
-ass
iste
d pr
ogra
ms
or p
roje
cts.
A
ll im
pact
ed o
wn
ers
will
be
pro
vid
ed n
otifi
catio
n of
RT
D’s
inte
nt to
acq
uir
e an
inte
rest
in th
eir
prop
erty
, in
clu
ding
a
wri
tten
offe
r le
tter
of j
ust c
ompe
nsat
ion
spec
ifica
lly d
escr
ibin
g th
ose
prop
ert
y in
tere
sts.
Far
mla
nd
s
Far
mla
nds
N
one
Non
e.
Lan
d A
cqu
isit
ion
, Dis
pla
cem
ents
, an
d R
elo
cati
on
of
Exi
stin
g U
ses
Acq
uisi
tion
of P
rope
rtie
s C
onst
ruct
ion
and
Ope
ratio
ns
A
cq
uis
itio
n.
The
acq
uisi
tion
of r
eal p
rop
erty
inte
rest
s w
ill c
ompl
y fu
lly w
ith th
e U
nifo
rm A
ct a
nd th
e F
ifth
Am
endm
ent o
f th
e U
S C
onst
itutio
n.
The
Uni
form
Act
app
lies
to a
ll ac
quis
ition
s of
rea
l pro
pert
y or
dis
pla
cem
ents
of p
eo
ple
resu
ltin
g fr
om fe
dera
l or
fede
rally
-ass
iste
d pr
ogr
ams
or p
roje
cts.
A
ll im
pact
ed o
wn
ers
will
be
pro
vid
ed n
otifi
catio
n of
RT
D’s
inte
nt to
acq
uir
e an
inte
rest
in th
eir
prop
erty
, in
clu
ding
a
wri
tten
offe
r le
tter
of j
ust c
ompe
nsat
ion
spec
ifica
lly d
escr
ibin
g th
ose
prop
ert
y in
tere
sts.
Fin
al E
nviro
nm
enta
l Im
pact
Sta
tem
ent a
nd
Sec
tion
4(f)
Eva
luat
ion
No
rth
Me
tro
Co
rrid
or
Janu
ary
2011
E
S-4
0
TAB
LE E
S-10
. PR
OPO
SED
MIT
IGA
TIO
N M
EASU
RES
— E
LEM
ENTS
OF
THE
PREF
ERR
ED A
LTER
NA
TIVE
Im
pac
t Im
pac
t T
ype
Mit
igat
ion
Mea
sure
s
Rel
ocat
ions
C
onst
ruct
ion
and
Ope
ratio
ns
R
elo
cati
on
An
alys
is.
RT
D w
ill p
repa
re a
rel
ocat
ion
anal
ysis
to e
nabl
e re
loca
tion
activ
ities
to b
e pl
ann
ed in
suc
h a
man
ner
that
the
prob
lem
s as
soci
ate
d w
ith th
e di
spla
cem
ent
of b
usin
esse
s ar
e re
cogn
ized
and
sol
utio
ns a
re d
evel
ope
d to
min
imiz
e th
e a
dver
se im
pact
s of
dis
plac
emen
t. T
he r
eloc
atio
n st
udy
will
est
imat
e th
e n
umbe
r, t
ype,
and
siz
e of
bu
sine
ss a
nd n
on-p
rofit
org
ani
zatio
ns to
be
disp
lace
d, a
nd th
e ap
pro
xim
ate
num
ber
of e
mp
loye
es th
at m
ay b
e af
fect
ed;
and
will
co
nsid
er a
ny
spec
ial a
dvis
ory
serv
ices
that
ma
y b
e n
eces
sary
fro
m R
TD
and
oth
er c
oop
erat
ing
age
ncie
s.
R
elo
cati
on
As
sist
ance
Ad
viso
ry S
ervi
ce.
Rel
ocat
ion
assi
stan
ce w
ill in
clud
e d
eter
min
ing
the
relo
catio
n ne
eds
an
d pr
efer
enc
es o
f ea
ch b
usin
ess
to b
e di
spla
ced
and
exp
lain
ing
the
relo
catio
n pa
yme
nts
and
othe
r as
sist
anc
e fo
r w
hic
h th
e bu
sine
ss o
wn
er
is e
ligib
le; p
rovi
din
g cu
rre
nt a
nd c
ont
inui
ng
info
rmat
ion
on t
he a
vaila
bilit
y, p
urch
ase
pric
es, a
nd r
enta
l co
sts
of c
ompa
rabl
e re
plac
emen
t com
mer
cial
pro
pert
ies;
an
d pr
ovid
ing
info
rmat
ion
on
oth
er p
rogr
ams
adm
inis
tere
d b
y th
e S
mal
l Bus
ines
s A
dmin
istr
atio
n a
nd o
ther
fede
ral,
stat
e, a
nd lo
cal p
rogr
ams
offe
ring
ass
ista
nce
to th
e di
spla
ced
busi
ness
es.
Rel
ocat
ion
assi
stan
ce w
ill a
lso
be p
rovi
ded
to r
esid
entia
l pro
pert
y o
wn
ers.
R
elo
cati
on
. T
he U
nifo
rm A
ct w
ill p
rovi
de
num
erou
s b
enef
its to
thes
e in
div
idu
als
to a
ssis
t th
em b
oth
fina
ncia
lly a
nd
with
ad
viso
ry s
ervi
ces
rela
ted
to r
elo
catio
n.
P
aym
ents
. T
he r
eloc
atio
n pa
yme
nts
prov
ide
d to
dis
plac
ed
pers
ons
will
be
det
erm
ined
by
fede
ral e
ligib
ility
gu
ide
lines
.
In
form
atio
nal
Mee
tin
g.
An
info
rmat
iona
l mee
ting
will
be
hel
d fo
r bu
sin
esse
s be
ing
relo
cate
d.
The
mee
ting
will
pro
vid
e an
intr
odu
ctio
n a
nd o
verv
iew
of t
he p
roce
ss a
ssoc
iate
d w
ith th
e U
nifo
rm A
ct, a
s w
ell a
s co
nso
lidat
ed in
form
atio
n o
n re
sour
ces
avai
labl
e, in
clu
ding
ass
ista
nce
from
loca
l, st
ate,
and
fed
era
l ag
enci
es a
nd
priv
ate
age
ncie
s in
the
com
mun
ity.
The
mee
ting
will
not
pro
vide
det
ails
re
late
d to
indi
vidu
al e
ligib
ility
.
NW
SS
Com
ple
x C
onst
ruct
ion
and
Ope
ratio
ns
R
TD
will
co
ntin
ue to
coo
rdin
ate
with
NW
SS
to a
ddre
ss im
pac
ts to
the
ope
ratio
ns a
t the
hor
se b
arn.
O
ne p
oten
tial
solu
tion,
as
disc
usse
d w
ith N
WS
S, i
s to
mod
ify th
e e
xist
ing
hors
e b
arn
at th
e N
WS
S c
ompl
ex
to m
itig
ate
for
the
impa
cts
to th
e ac
cess
and
op
erat
ions
ass
ocia
ted
with
the
loa
ding
at
the
rear
of t
he b
uild
ing.
The
mod
ifica
tions
will
not
red
uce
the
exis
ting
cap
acity
of t
he b
uild
ing.
Tax
i Dev
elo
pmen
t C
onst
ruct
ion
and
Ope
ratio
ns
R
TD
will
co
ntin
ue d
iscu
ssio
ns w
ith T
axi t
o a
ddr
ess
the
loss
of 7
5 sp
aces
that
are
par
t of t
he p
lann
ed d
evel
opm
ent.
Brig
hto
n B
oule
vard
C
onst
ruct
ion
A n
ew
8-f
oot p
arki
ng
lan
e w
oul
d b
e st
ripe
d on
the
eas
t sid
e of
Brig
hto
n B
oule
vard
, nor
th o
f the
Brig
hton
Bou
leva
rd a
nd
Yor
k S
tree
t int
erse
ctio
n (s
outh
of C
olum
bin
e S
tree
t), t
o m
itiga
te fo
r lo
ss o
f pa
rkin
g on
the
wes
t sid
e of
Brig
hto
n B
oule
vard
.
Met
ro W
aste
wat
er P
rope
rty
Con
stru
ctio
n an
d O
pera
tion
s
RT
D w
ill c
ont
inue
to w
ork
with
Met
ro W
aste
wat
er to
miti
gate
impa
cts
to th
eir
plan
ned
impr
ovem
ent
s.
Den
ver
Wat
er-M
iller
Res
ervo
ir
Pro
pert
y C
onst
ruct
ion
and
Ope
ratio
ns
R
TD
will
miti
gate
for
the
capa
city
lost
due
to th
e al
ignm
ent
. In
add
itio
n, R
TD
will
miti
gate
for
acc
ess
imp
act
s to
the
pum
p/in
take
sys
tem
and
will
rel
ocat
e th
e ca
reta
ker’s
hou
se (
the
loca
tion
is c
urre
ntly
unk
no
wn)
.
F
inal
Env
iron
men
tal I
mpa
ct S
tate
men
t an
d S
ectio
n 4(
f) E
valu
atio
n
No
rth
Me
tro
Co
rrid
or
E
S-4
1 Ja
nuar
y 20
11
TAB
LE E
S-10
. PR
OPO
SED
MIT
IGA
TIO
N M
EASU
RES
— E
LEM
ENTS
OF
THE
PREF
ERR
ED A
LTER
NA
TIVE
Im
pac
t Im
pac
t T
ype
Mit
igat
ion
Mea
sure
s
72n
d A
venu
e G
rave
l Com
pan
y O
wn
ed b
y F
rei A
lber
t an
d S
ons,
In
c.
Ope
ratio
ns
F
or th
e P
refe
rred
Alte
rnat
ive
in 2
020,
the
exi
stin
g ac
cess
to th
e gr
avel
ope
ratio
ns b
etw
ee
n O
’Bria
n C
anal
an
d th
e ex
istin
g tr
ack
will
be
relo
cate
d sl
ight
ly to
the
nor
th, s
o th
at th
ere
is a
se
para
te a
cces
s fr
om
the
prop
ose
d pa
rk-n
-Rid
e.
F
or th
e P
refe
rred
Alte
rnat
ive,
wh
en
the
plat
form
nee
ds to
be
exp
ande
d to
allo
w fo
r e
ight
veh
icle
s (a
ssum
ed to
be
in
203
5), t
he r
ail l
ine
grad
e-cr
ossi
ng fo
r th
e gr
ave
l op
erat
ions
will
be
relo
cate
d an
oth
er 4
00
to 5
00 fe
et to
the
nort
h to
allo
w
for
the
expa
nded
pla
tform
.
104th
Ave
nue
Sta
tion
C
onst
ruct
ion
and
Ope
ratio
ns
In
ord
er to
min
imiz
e co
nflic
ts a
nd m
axi
miz
e th
e ar
ea
for
buse
s, p
laza
, and
load
ing
dock
s, a
ll tr
affic
ope
ratio
ns, i
nclu
ding
th
e sh
oppi
ng c
ente
r se
rvic
e ve
hicl
es a
nd
empl
oye
es, a
nd
bus
es b
ehi
nd th
e sh
oppi
ng c
ente
r at
104
th A
venu
e, is
pr
opos
ed a
s o
ne-w
ay
from
the
nort
hw
est
to th
e so
uth
east
(fr
om 1
04th
Ave
nue
tow
ard
s C
olor
ado
Bou
leva
rd).
The
re w
ill
be a
med
ian
sepa
ratin
g bu
s tr
affic
from
cen
ter
empl
oye
es a
nd a
ll ot
her
cen
ter
serv
ices
that
occ
ur b
ehi
nd th
e b
uild
ing
(i.e.
, del
iver
y tr
ucks
).
Pat
rons
of t
he p
ark-
n-R
ide
wis
hing
to a
cces
s w
est
boun
d 10
4th A
venu
e w
oul
d ne
ed
to e
ither
turn
ou
t of t
he p
ark-
n-R
ide,
nor
th o
nto
Col
orad
o B
oule
vard
, and
then
we
st o
n 10
4th A
venu
e or
wo
rk th
eir
wa
y th
roug
h th
e pa
rk-n
-Rid
e un
dern
eath
the
trac
k an
d p
latfo
rm s
truc
ture
. V
ehic
les
will
not
be
able
to c
ut th
rou
gh th
e sh
opp
ing
cent
er a
s ce
nter
an
d pa
rk-n
-Rid
e tr
affic
are
seg
reg
ated
.
T
he th
ree
park
ing
spac
es th
at w
ill b
e im
pac
ted
at th
e G
reas
e M
onke
y w
ill b
e re
supp
lied
in a
diff
eren
t lo
catio
n o
n th
e pa
rce
l onc
e co
nstr
uctio
n is
co
mpl
ete.
T
empo
rary
Co
nstr
uctio
n E
asem
ents
C
onst
ruct
ion
Tem
pora
ry c
on
stru
ctio
n ea
sem
ents
will
be
nee
ded
to b
uild
the
Nor
th M
etro
Cor
ridor
Pro
ject
. T
he e
xten
t of
thes
e ea
sem
ents
is n
ot k
now
n at
this
tim
e an
d ap
pro
pria
te m
itiga
tion
me
asur
es w
ill b
e de
term
ined
dur
ing
pro
ject
des
ign.
Arc
hae
olo
gic
al,
His
tori
c, a
nd
Pal
eon
tolo
gic
al R
eso
urc
es
AR
CH
AE
OL
OG
ICA
L A
ND
HIS
TO
RIC
Adv
erse
Effe
cts
to T
wo
Arc
hae
olo
gica
l Res
ourc
es:
Q
uim
by
Ra
ilro
ad S
top
(5A
M21
11)
E
astla
ke R
ailr
oad
Sto
p (5
AM
2114
)
Con
stru
ctio
n
A
dher
e to
miti
gat
ion
me
asur
es
as s
tipul
ate
d in
the
MO
A.
Pot
entia
l Im
pact
s to
Unk
now
n A
rcha
eol
ogi
cal R
esou
rces
C
onst
ruct
ion
Con
trac
tor
trai
nin
g pr
ogra
m w
ill b
e un
dert
ake
n to
pro
mot
e r
esou
rce
aw
are
ness
and
avo
id im
pact
s.
A p
rofe
ssio
nal
arch
aeo
log
ist w
ill m
oni
tor
cons
truc
tion
activ
ities
; and
if r
esou
rces
are
dis
cove
red,
wo
rk w
ill c
ease
in th
e vi
cini
ty a
nd
SH
PO
will
be
not
ified
. P
roce
dur
es fo
r po
st-r
evi
ew
dis
cove
rie
s id
entif
ied
in th
e M
OA
will
be
follo
we
d.
Adv
erse
Effe
cts
to o
ne h
isto
ric
reso
urce
:
H
isto
ric F
arm
stea
d (5
AM
2158
)
Per
man
ent
A
dher
e to
miti
gat
ion
me
asur
es
as s
tipul
ate
d in
the
MO
A.
Fin
al E
nviro
nm
enta
l Im
pact
Sta
tem
ent a
nd
Sec
tion
4(f)
Eva
luat
ion
No
rth
Me
tro
Co
rrid
or
Janu
ary
2011
E
S-4
2
TAB
LE E
S-10
. PR
OPO
SED
MIT
IGA
TIO
N M
EASU
RES
— E
LEM
ENTS
OF
THE
PREF
ERR
ED A
LTER
NA
TIVE
Im
pac
t Im
pac
t T
ype
Mit
igat
ion
Mea
sure
s
PA
LE
ON
TO
LO
GIC
AL
Dire
ct Im
pact
s fr
om G
roun
d D
istu
rbin
g A
ctiv
ities
C
onst
ruct
ion
Sta
ndar
d m
itig
atio
n m
eas
ure
s, w
hich
follo
w t
he g
uide
lines
of t
he S
ocie
ty o
f Ver
tebr
ate
Pal
eon
tolo
gy
an
d m
eet t
he
stan
dard
s of
fede
ral a
genc
ies
and
the
Sta
te o
f C
olor
ado
, w
ill b
e im
plem
ente
d to
avo
id o
r m
inim
ize
impa
cts
to
pale
onto
logi
cal r
esou
rces
. If
pale
onto
logi
cal r
esou
rces
are
unc
over
ed in
the
CD
OT
RO
W d
urin
g pr
oje
ct c
onst
ruct
ion
in
area
s n
ot b
ein
g ac
tivel
y m
oni
tore
d, th
e C
DO
T P
aleo
nto
logi
st w
ill b
e n
otifi
ed.
A
reas
of n
o pa
leon
tolo
gica
l sen
sitiv
ity
with
in th
e A
PE
do
not r
equi
re m
itiga
tion.
Vis
ual
an
d A
est
het
ic Q
ual
itie
s
Sta
ging
Mat
eria
ls fo
r C
onst
ruct
ion
C
onst
ruct
ion
(Tem
pora
ry)
C
onst
ruct
ion
stag
ing
are
as w
ill b
e sc
ree
ned
or fe
nced
to m
inim
ize
vie
ws
of c
onst
ruct
ion
mat
eria
ls.
S
tagi
ng
are
as a
nd s
urro
und
ings
will
be
rep
lace
d an
d re
hab
ilita
ted
with
veg
etat
ion
as s
oon
as
poss
ible
aft
er c
onst
ruct
ion
. G
rass
es, f
orbs
, shr
ubs,
or
tree
s w
ill b
e re
plac
ed w
ith s
imila
r ve
geta
tion.
Lig
htin
g
Ope
ratio
ns
(Per
man
ent)
Lig
hts
used
will
be
low
-gla
re a
nd d
irec
ted
do
wn
wa
rd to
min
imiz
e lig
ht s
pill
and
gla
re to
re
side
nts
and
adj
acen
t roa
ds.
LED
an
d “d
ark
sky”
ligh
ting
prac
tices
are
rec
omm
ende
d.
Noi
se W
alls
(R
esid
entia
l) an
d S
tatio
n Lo
catio
ns A
djac
ent t
o P
rope
rty
Ow
ners
Ope
ratio
ns
(Per
man
ent)
Loca
l mun
icip
alit
ies
will
be
cons
ulte
d on
the
desi
gn o
f w
alls
and
str
uctu
res.
Fen
cin
g
Ope
ratio
ns
(Per
man
ent)
Sou
ther
n S
ectio
n: p
ost a
nd
cabl
e on
the
two
Sou
th P
latte
Riv
er a
nd
Sou
th P
latte
Riv
er T
rail
cros
sing
s a
nd h
igh
tens
ile
rura
l fen
ce a
t Ste
ele
Str
eet P
ark
are
a.
Rep
laci
ng/A
ddi
ng B
ridge
/Aer
ial
Str
uctu
res
Ope
ratio
ns
(Per
man
ent)
Loca
l mun
icip
alit
ies
will
be
cons
ulte
d fo
r de
sign
, col
or, a
nd
mat
eria
l crit
eria
for
desi
gn
guid
elin
es.
F
inal
Env
iron
men
tal I
mpa
ct S
tate
men
t an
d S
ectio
n 4(
f) E
valu
atio
n
No
rth
Me
tro
Co
rrid
or
E
S-4
3 Ja
nuar
y 20
11
TAB
LE E
S-10
. PR
OPO
SED
MIT
IGA
TIO
N M
EASU
RES
— E
LEM
ENTS
OF
THE
PREF
ERR
ED A
LTER
NA
TIVE
Im
pac
t Im
pac
t T
ype
Mit
igat
ion
Mea
sure
s
Par
klan
ds
and
Rec
reat
ion
Are
as
At-
grad
e S
ide
wa
lk, T
rail,
and
B
ike
Ro
ute
Cro
ssin
gs a
t Str
eets
C
onst
ruct
ion
and
Ope
ratio
ns
S
ee C
hap
ter
4, T
rans
port
atio
n,
for
miti
gatio
n m
easu
res.
Dire
ct Im
pact
s to
At-
grad
e T
rail
Cro
ssin
gs o
f the
Alig
nmen
t (N
ot
at S
tree
ts)
Ope
ratio
ns
A
t the
reg
iona
l tra
il ac
cess
fro
m F
erna
ld T
railh
ead,
a tr
ail u
nde
rpas
s w
ill b
e p
rovi
ded
. T
he tr
ail w
ill b
e re
alig
ned
and
ac
com
mo
date
d un
der
nea
th th
e pr
opo
sed
alig
nmen
t an
d th
e e
xist
ing
alig
nm
ent v
ia a
n u
nde
rpas
s ap
pro
xim
atel
y 3
00 fe
et
nort
h of
the
exi
stin
g cr
ossi
ng lo
catio
n. T
he tr
ail w
ill r
eco
nne
ct w
ith th
e e
xist
ing
trai
l alig
nmen
t on
the
we
st s
ide
of
O’B
rian
Can
al.
Thi
s w
ill a
llow
tra
il us
ers
to c
ross
the
alig
nmen
t w
itho
ut d
ela
ys.
S
ign
al D
itch
Tra
il w
ill b
e re
alig
ned
to r
oute
use
rs a
cros
s th
e al
ignm
ent
alo
ng
128th
Ave
nue
. T
he e
xist
ing
ped
estr
ian
faci
lity
alon
g 1
28th
Ave
nue
will
be
upgr
ade
d to
a 1
0-fo
ot m
ulti
-use
pat
h b
etw
ee
n th
e U
P R
ailro
ad T
rail
on th
e ea
st s
ide
of
the
alig
nme
nt a
nd th
e S
ign
al D
itch
Tra
il w
est
of th
e al
ignm
ent.
A
t Roc
ky T
op M
iddl
e S
cho
ol C
onne
ctor
Tra
il, a
trai
l und
erp
ass
will
be
pro
vide
d at
the
exi
stin
g cr
ossi
ng lo
catio
n to
m
aint
ain
the
conn
ectiv
ity b
etw
een
nei
ghb
orh
oods
, the
sch
ool
, and
the
ball
field
s.
T
he s
egm
ent o
f E
astla
ke R
eser
voir
#1
Sid
ew
alk
/Loc
al T
rail
acro
ss th
e al
ignm
ent
wo
uld
be r
ealig
ned
to im
prov
e sa
fety
. T
his
trai
l cur
rent
ly c
ross
es th
e al
ignm
ent
adj
acen
t to
the
sout
h si
de o
f 124
th A
venu
e, w
hich
cro
sses
the
alig
nmen
t at a
n ap
pro
xim
ate
ly 3
0 de
gre
e an
gle
. T
he r
ealig
nm
ent o
f the
trai
l wo
uld
deta
ch t
he tr
ail f
rom
the
road
wa
y at
this
loca
tion
and
rout
e it
acro
ss t
he a
lignm
ent
at a
ppro
xim
ate
ly a
90
degr
ee
ang
le (
perp
end
icul
ar).
Dire
ct Im
pact
s to
Tra
ils a
nd
Ped
estr
ian
Fac
ilitie
s D
ue to
S
tatio
ns, R
oad
wa
y or
Dra
ina
ge
Impr
ovem
ent
s
Con
stru
ctio
n an
d O
pera
tion
s
The
Col
orad
o A
gric
ultu
ral T
rail
wou
ld b
e re
cons
truc
ted
and
inco
rpor
ate
d in
to th
e de
sign
of t
he 8
8th A
venu
e st
atio
n fo
llow
ing
a si
mila
r al
ignm
ent t
o th
e cu
rren
t tra
il.
T
he c
onne
ctio
n be
twe
en th
e C
olor
ado
Agr
icul
tura
l Tra
il an
d th
e 88
th A
ven
ue s
ide
wa
lk w
ill b
e re
cons
truc
ted
to m
aint
ain
th
e cu
rren
t fun
ctio
n of
this
rec
reat
iona
l fac
ility
so
that
no
lon
g-te
rm im
pact
s w
ill o
ccur
.
T
he 1
12th
Ave
nue
Det
ache
d M
ulti-
use
Pat
h/S
outh
Sid
ew
alk
will
be
reco
nstr
ucte
d to
mai
ntai
n th
e cu
rren
t fu
nctio
n of
this
re
crea
tiona
l fac
ility
so
that
no
long
-ter
m im
pac
ts w
ill o
ccur
.
T
he E
astla
ke R
eser
voir
#1 S
ide
wa
lk/L
ocal
Tra
il w
ill b
e re
cons
truc
ted
to m
aint
ain
the
curr
ent
func
tion
of
this
rec
reat
iona
l fa
cilit
y so
that
no
long
-ter
m im
pact
s w
ill o
ccur
.
T
he H
aven
Tra
il ne
ar th
e 14
4th A
venu
e S
tatio
n w
ill b
e re
cons
truc
ted
to m
aint
ain
the
curr
ent f
unct
ion
of th
is r
ecre
atio
nal
fa
cilit
y so
that
no
long
-ter
m im
pact
s w
ill o
ccur
.
Fin
al E
nviro
nm
enta
l Im
pact
Sta
tem
ent a
nd
Sec
tion
4(f)
Eva
luat
ion
No
rth
Me
tro
Co
rrid
or
Janu
ary
2011
E
S-4
4
TAB
LE E
S-10
. PR
OPO
SED
MIT
IGA
TIO
N M
EASU
RES
— E
LEM
ENTS
OF
THE
PREF
ERR
ED A
LTER
NA
TIVE
Im
pac
t Im
pac
t T
ype
Mit
igat
ion
Mea
sure
s
Tem
pora
ry Im
pac
ts to
Tra
il C
ross
ings
of t
he A
lignm
ent
(Not
at
Str
eets
)
Con
stru
ctio
n
C
losu
re o
f tra
ils d
urin
g co
nstr
uctio
n w
ill b
e a
void
ed to
the
gre
ates
t ext
ent p
ossi
ble.
B
efo
re b
egin
nin
g co
nstr
uctio
n,
ade
quat
e tr
ail d
etou
rs, i
nclu
ding
adv
ance
d n
otic
e an
d si
gni
ng w
ill b
e pr
ovid
ed.
Det
our
sig
nage
will
com
ply
with
the
Am
eric
ans
with
Dis
abili
ties
Act
of 1
990
and
Par
t 6F
of t
he M
anu
al o
n U
nifo
rm T
raffi
c C
ontr
ol D
evic
es (
FH
WA
200
7).
Use
of t
rail
deto
urs
will
be
limite
d to
onl
y th
ose
peri
ods
of c
ons
truc
tion
activ
ity th
at a
re n
eces
sary
for
saf
ety
. S
peci
fic
deta
ils a
bou
t clo
sure
s, in
clud
ing
dura
tion
and
deto
ur r
out
es,
will
be
det
erm
ine
d du
ring
fin
al d
esig
n.
W
alki
ng s
truc
ture
s co
uld
be
empl
oye
d fo
r so
me
trai
l cro
ssin
gs in
ord
er to
pre
vent
or
limit
the
nee
d fo
r cl
osur
es.
In
add
ition
, the
co
ntra
ctor
will
be
requ
ired
to p
ublic
ly a
nno
unce
an
y tr
ail c
losu
res
and
will
be
expe
cte
d to
pro
vid
e cl
earl
y m
arke
d d
etou
rs.
If
nece
ssar
y, th
e co
ntra
ctor
co
uld
prov
ide
trai
l pro
tect
ion
in th
e fo
rm o
f a fl
agge
r fo
r at
-gra
de c
ross
ings
in o
rder
to a
void
or
min
imiz
e cl
osu
res.
C
onst
ruct
ion
equ
ipm
ent s
tag
ing
will
not
occ
ur o
n tr
ails
.
Tem
pora
ry Im
pac
ts to
Tra
ils
Due
to S
tatio
n C
onst
ruct
ion
C
onst
ruct
ion
Clo
sure
of t
rails
dur
ing
cons
truc
tion
will
be
avo
ided
to th
e g
reat
est e
xten
t pos
sibl
e.
Bef
ore
beg
inn
ing
cons
truc
tion,
ad
equ
ate
trai
l det
ours
, inc
ludi
ng a
dvan
ced
not
ice
and
sig
ning
will
be
prov
ided
. D
eto
ur s
igna
ge w
ill c
ompl
y w
ith th
e A
mer
ica
ns w
ith D
isab
ilitie
s A
ct o
f 199
0 a
nd P
art 6
F o
f the
Man
ual
on
Uni
form
Tra
ffic
Con
trol
Dev
ices
(F
HW
A 2
007)
. U
se o
f tra
il de
tour
s w
ill b
e lim
ited
to o
nly
thos
e pe
riod
s of
co
nstr
uctio
n ac
tivity
that
are
nec
essa
ry f
or s
afe
ty.
Spe
cific
de
tails
ab
out c
losu
res,
incl
udin
g du
ratio
n an
d de
tour
ro
utes
, w
ill b
e d
eter
min
ed
duri
ng fi
nal
des
ign.
T
he n
ew
sec
tion
of th
e C
olor
ado
Agr
icul
tura
l Tra
il w
ould
be
cons
truc
ted
prio
r to
dem
oliti
on
of th
e ex
istin
g al
ignm
ent
. T
rail
acce
ss w
ould
be
mai
ntai
ned
dur
ing
con
stru
ctio
n ei
ther
via
the
exi
stin
g or
ne
w tr
ail a
lignm
ent.
Dire
ct Im
pact
s to
Par
ks:
Con
stru
ctio
n an
d O
pera
tion
s
G
lobe
ville
La
ndi
ng
Par
k:
0.66
acr
e, r
emov
al o
f tre
es,
and
fris
bee
gol
f ho
les.
Mon
etar
y co
mpe
nsat
ion
for
tree
s re
mov
ed.
F
undi
ng fo
r m
ast
er p
lan
of fr
isbe
e g
olf c
ours
e.
T
he p
ortio
n of
the
dist
urbe
d ar
ea t
hat i
s as
soci
ated
with
tem
pora
ry im
pact
s w
ill b
e re
stor
ed
to a
con
diti
on th
at is
at l
east
as
goo
d as
tha
t w
hich
exi
ste
d p
rior
to th
e pr
oje
ct.
G
rand
vie
w P
ond
s O
pen
Spa
ce a
nd P
rairi
e D
og
Hab
itat:
0.17
acr
e du
e to
ro
adw
ay
impr
ove
men
ts a
nd
drai
nag
e im
pro
vem
ents
The
are
a im
pact
ed fo
r dr
ain
age
impr
ovem
ent
s w
ill b
e re
grad
ed
so a
s no
t to
impa
ct r
ecre
atio
nal/o
pen
spac
e us
e.
F
ox R
un
Ope
n S
pace
and
T
rail
Net
wor
k: 0
.38
acre
du
e to
dra
inag
e im
prov
emen
ts.
Reg
rade
so
as n
ot to
impa
ct r
ecre
atio
nal/o
pen
spa
ce u
se.
F
inal
Env
iron
men
tal I
mpa
ct S
tate
men
t an
d S
ectio
n 4(
f) E
valu
atio
n
No
rth
Me
tro
Co
rrid
or
E
S-4
5 Ja
nuar
y 20
11
TAB
LE E
S-10
. PR
OPO
SED
MIT
IGA
TIO
N M
EASU
RES
— E
LEM
ENTS
OF
THE
PREF
ERR
ED A
LTER
NA
TIVE
Im
pac
t Im
pac
t T
ype
Mit
igat
ion
Mea
sure
s
E
astla
ke R
ailr
oad
Pro
per
ty:
0.85
acr
e d
ue t
o dr
aina
ge
and
stat
ion
imp
rove
me
nts.
Reg
rade
so
as n
ot to
impa
ct r
ecre
atio
nal/o
pen
spa
ce u
se.
T
he p
ortio
n of
the
dist
urbe
d ar
ea t
hat i
s as
soci
ated
with
tem
pora
ry im
pact
s w
ill b
e re
stor
ed
to a
con
diti
on th
at is
at l
east
as
goo
d as
tha
t w
hich
exi
ste
d p
rior
to th
e pr
oje
ct.
La
rry
Wa
lker
Bal
l Fie
lds:
0.
02 a
cre
to p
ark
ing
due
to
new
trai
l und
erpa
ss.
Reg
rade
so
as n
ot to
impa
ct p
arki
ng
supp
ly.
C
herr
ywoo
d P
ark
III:
0.4
acre
du
e to
ne
w tr
ail
und
erpa
ss.
No
miti
gatio
n.
F
allb
rook
Far
ms
Det
entio
n/
Pla
ygro
und:
0.4
acr
e du
e to
ne
w tr
ail u
nder
pass
.
Avo
id im
pact
to p
layg
rou
nd.
Dire
ct/In
dire
ct Im
pact
s to
Gra
de-
sepa
rate
d T
rails
C
onst
ruct
ion
and
Ope
ratio
ns
S
outh
Pla
tte R
iver
Tra
il (f
irst c
ross
ing)
: ne
w b
ridg
e pi
er in
gre
en
wa
y.
See
the
Sec
tion
6(f)
Eva
luat
ion
in C
hap
ter
7, F
inal
Sec
tion
4(f)
and
6(f
) E
valu
atio
n, fo
r m
itiga
tion
mea
sure
s as
soci
ated
w
ith im
pac
ts to
the
gree
nw
ay
at th
e fir
st c
ross
ing
of th
e S
ou
th P
latte
Riv
er T
rail
nort
heas
t of P
ark
Ave
nue.
S
outh
Pla
tte R
iver
Tra
il (s
econ
d cr
ossi
ng):
Red
uce
d vi
sibi
lity
due
to n
ew
bri
dge.
At t
he lo
catio
n of
the
new
bri
dge
str
uctu
re (
nor
thea
st o
f 38th
Str
eet n
ear
Glo
bevi
lle L
and
ing
Par
k), m
irror
s, s
igna
ge,
and
un
der
pass
lig
htin
g w
ill b
e pr
ovid
ed
to e
nhan
ce v
isib
ility
for
trai
l use
rs.
G
rang
e H
all C
reek
Tra
il:
seco
nd
trac
k ad
ded
over
tr
ail u
nde
rpas
s.
The
exi
stin
g pe
dest
rian
unde
rpas
s w
ill b
e ex
tend
ed b
y 20
feet
to
acco
mm
odat
e th
e ex
tra
wid
th o
f the
rai
l tra
cks.
Dire
ct I
mpa
cts
to F
allb
rook
F
arm
s T
rail
Du
e to
Ne
w T
rail
Und
erpa
ss
Con
stru
ctio
n
R
eloc
ate
the
exi
stin
g co
nnec
tion
to th
e R
ocky
Top
Mid
dle
Sch
ool C
onne
ctor
Tra
il to
mai
ntai
n ac
cess
bet
we
en
thes
e tw
o tr
ails
.
Fin
al E
nviro
nm
enta
l Im
pact
Sta
tem
ent a
nd
Sec
tion
4(f)
Eva
luat
ion
No
rth
Me
tro
Co
rrid
or
Janu
ary
2011
E
S-4
6
TAB
LE E
S-10
. PR
OPO
SED
MIT
IGA
TIO
N M
EASU
RES
— E
LEM
ENTS
OF
THE
PREF
ERR
ED A
LTER
NA
TIVE
Im
pac
t Im
pac
t T
ype
Mit
igat
ion
Mea
sure
s
Air
Qu
alit
y
Air
Qua
lity
Imp
acts
Dur
ing
Con
stru
ctio
n a
nd O
pera
tions
O
pera
tions
No
miti
gat
ion
requ
ired;
ho
wev
er, g
ener
al a
ir qu
alit
y m
itiga
tion
stra
tegi
es fo
r th
e F
asT
rack
s P
rogr
am w
ill b
e im
plem
ente
d.
The
se m
ay
incl
ude:
E
ncou
ragi
ng p
eop
le to
use
alte
rnat
ive
met
hods
of t
rave
ling
from
nea
rby
neig
hbor
hood
s to
the
tran
sit s
tatio
ns,
incl
udi
ng b
us, p
edes
tria
n ac
cess
, and
bic
ycle
.
Id
ling
redu
ctio
n te
chno
log
ies
to r
educ
e id
ling
times
for
dies
el e
ngin
es (
app
licab
le to
truc
ks a
nd b
uses
).
RT
D c
ould
gi
ve p
rior
ity to
con
trac
tors
tha
t us
e th
ese
tech
nolo
gie
s o
n n
ew
eq
uipm
ent
or th
at r
etro
fit o
lder
equ
ipm
ent
.
P
urch
asin
g ne
w R
TD
veh
icle
s an
d re
trof
ittin
g th
e e
xist
ing
vehi
cle
fleet
with
em
issi
ons
equi
pmen
t.
M
odify
ing
buse
s w
ith m
ore
effic
ient
ele
ctro
nic
engi
ne c
ont
rols
and
fuel
inje
ctio
ns.
P
urch
asin
g ne
w b
uses
equ
ippe
d w
ith p
artic
ulat
e fil
ters
and
exh
aust
re-
circ
ulat
ors.
U
sing
low
-sul
fur
dies
el f
uel o
r bi
o-di
esel
(B
20
) in
bus
es.
R
TD
cur
rent
ly u
ses
a 3-
min
ute
bus
idle
lim
it th
at r
equi
res
driv
ers
to s
hut d
ow
n th
eir
eng
ine
s af
ter
idlin
g fo
r m
ore
than
3
min
utes
.
R
TD
cur
rent
ly h
as m
aint
enan
ce p
roce
dure
s to
red
uce
emis
sion
s.
The
se in
clu
de p
erio
dic
emis
sio
n op
acity
test
ing,
sc
hed
ule
d fr
ont-
end
alig
nmen
ts to
impr
ove
fuel
effi
cien
cy, a
nd o
ptim
izin
g tr
ansm
issi
on
shift
ing
poi
nts.
R
TD
is c
urre
ntly
co
nduc
ting
a de
mo
nstr
atio
n pr
ogra
m u
sin
g h
ybrid
die
sel-e
lect
ric b
uses
for
serv
ice
rout
es.
O
ptim
izin
g si
gnal
tim
ing
at in
ters
ectio
ns le
ad
ing
to s
tatio
ns to
min
imiz
e id
ling
time.
F
inal
Env
iron
men
tal I
mpa
ct S
tate
men
t an
d S
ectio
n 4(
f) E
valu
atio
n
No
rth
Me
tro
Co
rrid
or
E
S-4
7 Ja
nuar
y 20
11
TAB
LE E
S-10
. PR
OPO
SED
MIT
IGA
TIO
N M
EASU
RES
— E
LEM
ENTS
OF
THE
PREF
ERR
ED A
LTER
NA
TIVE
Im
pac
t Im
pac
t T
ype
Mit
igat
ion
Mea
sure
s
Air
Qua
lity
Impa
cts
Dur
ing
Co
nstr
uct
ion
and
Ope
ratio
ns
Tem
pora
ry
Con
stru
ctio
n
R
TD
will
incl
ud
e la
ngu
age
in th
e co
nstr
uctio
n s
peci
ficat
ions
tha
t w
ill r
equ
ire
all
cons
truc
tion
equ
ipm
ent
to b
e eq
uip
ped
in
acco
rdan
ce w
ith U
SE
PA
req
uire
men
ts.
S
ite-s
peci
fic m
itiga
tion
mea
sure
s w
ill b
e in
clu
ded
in a
con
stru
ctio
n m
ana
gem
ent p
lan.
C
onst
ruct
ion-
rela
ted
fugi
tive
emis
sio
ns w
ill b
e m
inim
ize
d b
y im
ple
me
ntin
g d
ust c
ontr
ol p
ract
ices
that
ma
y in
clu
de:
W
ater
or
wet
ting
age
nts
to m
anag
e du
st.
W
ind
barr
iers
and
win
d sc
ree
ns
to m
inim
ize
the
spre
adin
g o
f du
st in
are
as w
her
e la
rge
am
ount
s of
mat
eria
ls a
re
stor
ed.
A
wh
eel w
ash
stat
ion
and/
or la
rge-
diam
eter
cob
ble
apr
on a
t eg
ress
/ingr
ess
area
s to
min
imiz
e di
rt b
ein
g tr
acke
d on
to
pub
lic s
tree
ts.
V
acuu
m-p
ow
ere
d st
reet
sw
eepe
rs to
con
trol
dirt
trac
ked
onto
str
eets
.
C
over
ing
all d
ump
tru
cks
leav
ing
the
site
.
C
over
ing
or w
etti
ng te
mpo
rary
exc
avat
ed m
ater
ials
.
U
sing
a b
indi
ng
age
nt fo
r lo
ng-
term
exc
avat
ed m
ater
ials
.
M
onito
ring
for
PM
10 to
allo
w f
or th
e re
al-t
ime
mod
ifica
tion
or im
plem
ent
atio
n of
var
ious
du
st c
ontr
ol m
easu
res.
P
rohi
bitin
g un
nec
essa
ry id
ling
of c
onst
ruct
ion
equ
ipm
ent.
Lo
catin
g d
iese
l eng
ines
and
mot
ors
as fa
r aw
ay
as p
ossi
ble
from
res
ide
ntia
l are
as.
Lo
catin
g st
agin
g ar
eas
as fa
r a
wa
y as
pos
sibl
e fr
om r
esid
ent
ial a
reas
.
D
urin
g w
inte
r co
nstr
uctio
n, in
stal
ling
engi
ne p
re-h
eat
er d
evic
es to
elim
inat
e un
nec
essa
ry id
ling.
P
rohi
bitin
g ta
mpe
ring
with
equ
ipm
ent
to in
cre
ase
hors
epow
er
or to
def
eat t
he e
ffect
iven
ess
of e
mis
sion
co
ntro
l de
vice
s.
R
equi
ring
co
nstr
uctio
n ve
hic
le e
ngin
es to
be
prop
erly
tun
ed a
nd m
ain
tain
ed.
U
sing
con
stru
ctio
n ve
hic
les
and
eq
uipm
ent
with
the
min
imum
pra
ctic
al e
ngi
ne
size
for
the
inte
nde
d jo
bs.
W
ork
will
be
sche
dul
ed
outs
ide
of n
orm
al h
our
s fo
r se
nsiti
ve r
ecep
tors
or
the
faci
litie
s w
ill b
e ad
just
ed (
shou
ld o
nly
be
nece
ssar
y in
ext
rem
e ci
rcum
stan
ces,
suc
h a
s co
nstr
uctio
n im
med
iate
ly a
dja
cent
to a
he
alth
car
e fa
cilit
y, c
hurc
h, o
utd
oor
pla
ygro
und
, or
scho
ol).
En
erg
y
Use
of E
nerg
y R
eso
urce
s D
urin
g C
ons
tru
ctio
n an
d O
pera
tions
Con
stru
ctio
n an
d O
pera
tion
s D
esig
n ef
fort
s to
red
uce
ener
gy
cons
umpt
ion
and
over
all V
MT
will
be
imp
lem
ente
d as
follo
ws:
M
ultip
le a
cces
s po
ints
will
be
crea
ted
for
par
king
lots
, w
her
e po
ssib
le.
“K
iss-
n-R
ide”
dro
p-of
fs w
ill b
e de
sign
ed
to m
axim
ize
effic
ienc
y an
d to
min
imiz
e th
e nu
mb
er o
f veh
icle
s id
ling.
S
tatio
ns w
ill b
e p
ositi
one
d to
be
mor
e ea
sily
acc
essi
ble
by
ped
estr
ians
and
bic
yclis
ts.
P
ark-
n-R
ide
impr
ovem
ents
will
be
desi
gne
d to
dec
reas
e e
ner
gy
cons
umpt
ion,
con
sist
ent
with
RT
D’s
sus
tain
abi
lity
polic
y.
Fin
al E
nviro
nm
enta
l Im
pact
Sta
tem
ent a
nd
Sec
tion
4(f)
Eva
luat
ion
No
rth
Me
tro
Co
rrid
or
Janu
ary
2011
E
S-4
8
TAB
LE E
S-10
. PR
OPO
SED
MIT
IGA
TIO
N M
EASU
RES
— E
LEM
ENTS
OF
THE
PREF
ERR
ED A
LTER
NA
TIVE
Im
pac
t Im
pac
t T
ype
Mit
igat
ion
Mea
sure
s
No
ise
and
Vib
rati
on
Noi
se R
elat
ed t
o T
empo
rary
C
onst
ruct
ion
Act
iviti
es
Con
stru
ctio
n
A
pplic
able
loca
l noi
se r
egu
latio
ns w
ill b
e fo
llow
ed.
N
ight
time
cons
truc
tion
in r
esid
entia
l nei
ghbo
rhoo
ds w
ill b
e a
void
ed,
wh
en p
ossi
ble.
S
tatio
nary
co
nst
ruct
ion
equi
pm
ent
will
be
loca
ted
as fa
r as
pos
sib
le fr
om n
oise
-sen
sitiv
e s
ites.
N
oise
bar
rier
s, s
uch
as te
mpo
rary
wa
lls o
r pi
les
of e
xcav
ate
d m
ater
ial,
will
be
cons
truc
ted
bet
wee
n no
isy
activ
ities
an
d no
ise-
sens
itive
rec
eive
rs.
C
onst
ruct
ion-
rela
ted
truc
k tr
affic
alo
ng r
oad
wa
ys w
ill b
e re
-rou
ted
to c
aus
e th
e le
ast d
istu
rba
nce
to r
esid
ents
.
A
com
mun
icat
ions
pla
n fo
r co
nstr
uctio
n ac
tiviti
es w
ill b
e d
evel
ope
d.
Noi
se fr
om T
rain
Ope
ratio
ns
Ope
ratio
ns a
nd
Des
ign
RT
D w
ill w
ork
with
the
mun
icip
aliti
es to
est
abl
ish
Qu
iet Z
ones
.
16
,50
0 fe
et o
f 8-
to 1
2-fo
ot-h
igh
nois
e b
arrie
rs w
ill b
e co
nstr
ucte
d as
follo
ws:
1,
200-
foot
bar
rier
sou
th o
f 10
4th A
venu
e on
the
we
st s
ide
(12
-fee
t hig
h)
1,
300-
foot
bar
rier
nor
th o
f 10
4th A
venu
e o
n th
e ea
st s
ide
(8-f
eet h
igh)
3,
700-
foot
bar
rier
sou
th o
f Yor
k S
tree
t on
the
east
sid
e (1
2-fe
et h
igh)
3,
900-
foot
bar
rier
sou
th o
f Yor
k S
tree
t on
the
we
st s
ide
(10-
feet
hig
h)
30
0-fo
ot b
arri
er
sout
h of
136
th A
venu
e o
n th
e w
est s
ide
of Y
ork
Str
eet (
10-f
eet h
igh)
2,
400-
foot
bar
rier
nor
th o
f 13
6th A
venu
e o
n th
e ea
st s
ide
(12
-fee
t hig
h)
1,
900-
foot
bar
rier
nor
th o
f 13
6th A
venu
e o
n th
e w
est
sid
e (8
-fee
t hig
h)
1,
800-
foot
bar
rier
sou
th o
f E-4
70 o
n th
e w
est s
ide
(12-
feet
hig
h)
A
s a
resu
lt of
mor
e ad
vanc
ed
eng
inee
ring
com
plet
ed fo
llow
ing
the
DE
IS, n
oise
ana
lysi
s in
dica
ted
that
impa
cts
are
redu
ced
and
ther
efor
e n
oise
wa
ll m
itiga
tion
requ
irem
ent
s ha
ve d
ecre
ased
. S
ince
exa
ct v
ehic
le s
peci
fica
tions
an
d tr
ack
desi
gn w
ill n
ot b
e kn
ow
n u
ntil
Fin
al D
esig
n, R
TD
will
est
abl
ish
a N
ois
e M
itiga
tion
Fun
d in
the
am
ount
of $
10 m
illio
n.
Thi
s m
one
y w
ill b
e he
ld u
ntil
Fin
al D
esig
n is
com
plet
ed; t
here
afte
r, a
ne
w n
oise
ana
lysi
s w
ill b
e co
nduc
ted
to d
eter
min
e an
y ch
ang
es to
miti
gatio
n re
qui
rem
ent
s w
hich
will
su
bse
qu
ently
be
pai
d fo
r th
roug
h th
e u
se o
f the
se fu
nds
as
nece
ssar
y.
Vib
ratio
n fr
om T
empo
rary
C
onst
ruct
ion
Act
iviti
es
Con
stru
ctio
n
N
ight
time
cons
truc
tion
in r
esid
entia
l nei
ghbo
rhoo
ds w
ill b
e a
void
ed,
wh
ere
poss
ible
.
A
ltern
ativ
e co
nst
ruct
ion
met
hod
s w
ill b
e us
ed
to m
inim
ize
the
use
of im
pa
ct a
nd v
ibra
tory
equ
ipm
ent (
e.g
., pi
le d
river
s an
d co
mpa
ctor
s).
C
onst
ruct
ion-
rela
ted
truc
k tr
affic
will
be
re-r
out
ed to
roa
dw
ays
that
will
cau
se th
e le
ast d
istu
rban
ce to
res
ide
nts.
F
inal
Env
iron
men
tal I
mpa
ct S
tate
men
t an
d S
ectio
n 4(
f) E
valu
atio
n
No
rth
Me
tro
Co
rrid
or
E
S-4
9 Ja
nuar
y 20
11
TAB
LE E
S-10
. PR
OPO
SED
MIT
IGA
TIO
N M
EASU
RES
— E
LEM
ENTS
OF
THE
PREF
ERR
ED A
LTER
NA
TIVE
Im
pac
t Im
pac
t T
ype
Mit
igat
ion
Mea
sure
s
Bio
log
ical
Res
ou
rces
Loss
of V
eget
atio
n
Con
stru
ctio
n
G
radi
ng
pla
ns w
ill m
inim
ize
rem
oval
of r
ipar
ian
vege
tatio
n.
D
urin
g co
nstr
uct
ion,
veh
icle
ope
ratio
n w
ill b
e li
mite
d to
des
igna
ted
cons
tru
ctio
n ar
eas
, an
d th
e lim
its o
f the
con
stru
ctio
n
area
will
be
fen
ced
wh
ere
the
y ar
e ad
jace
nt to
sen
sitiv
e ha
bita
ts, i
nclu
din
g rip
aria
n ar
eas,
wet
land
s, a
nd
upla
nd tr
ees
an
d sh
rubs
.
S
ilt fe
ncin
g, e
rosi
on
logs
, tem
pora
ry b
erm
s, a
nd o
ther
BM
Ps
will
be
used
to
prev
ent
deg
rada
tion
of h
abi
tats
adj
ace
nt to
co
nstr
uctio
n.
T
empo
rary
dis
turb
anc
e w
ill b
e s
eede
d w
ith a
n ap
prop
riate
mix
ture
of n
ativ
e gr
asse
s a
nd f
orbs
. S
hrub
s w
ill b
e pl
ante
d w
her
e ap
prop
riat
e, s
uch
as in
will
ow
-dom
inat
ed r
ipar
ian
are
as o
r ot
her
hab
itats
that
nat
ural
ly in
clu
de s
hrub
s.
D
istu
rbed
rip
aria
n ha
bita
t w
ill b
e pl
ante
d w
ith n
ativ
e tr
ees
and
shr
ubs
an
d be
see
ded
and
re-
grad
ed a
s so
on a
s pr
actic
abl
e a
nd b
iolo
gica
lly a
ppr
opri
ate.
N
ativ
e gr
asse
s, fo
rbs,
and
shr
ubs
will
als
o be
se
ede
d in
rip
aria
n ar
eas.
M
BT
A m
itiga
tion
mea
sure
s w
ill b
e fo
llow
ed
to a
void
vio
latio
ns
from
veg
etat
ion
rem
oval
.
A
ll im
pact
ed tr
ees
in R
TD
RO
W w
ith a
dia
met
er a
t bre
ast h
eig
ht g
reat
er th
an 1
inch
will
be
repl
aced
at a
1:1
rat
io.
Loss
of P
rairi
e D
og C
olo
nies
C
onst
ruct
ion
R
TD
gui
danc
e on
pra
irie
dog
miti
gatio
n w
ill b
e im
plem
ente
d.
Thi
s m
itiga
tion
incl
udes
:
C
orrid
or p
roje
cts
will
be
des
igne
d a
nd c
ons
truc
ted
to a
void
and
min
imiz
e im
pact
s to
pra
irie
do
g co
loni
es g
reat
er th
an
2 ac
res
in a
rea
as
long
as
doin
g so
do
es n
ot in
crea
se im
pact
s to
oth
er r
esou
rces
and
is n
ot c
ost p
rohi
biti
ve.
If
a co
lon
y is
less
than
2 a
cres
, bu
t has
the
pot
entia
l to
exp
and
into
are
as t
hat a
re c
urre
ntly
inac
tive
(i.e.
, not
co
nstr
aine
d), t
he a
vaila
ble
and
acce
ssib
le h
abita
t w
ill b
e th
e de
term
inin
g fa
ctor
of s
ize
of th
e ar
ea to
be
cons
ider
ed.
R
eloc
atio
n of
pra
irie
dog
s w
ill b
e co
ordi
nat
ed w
ith C
DO
W a
nd th
e lo
cal j
uris
dict
ion,
and
con
duc
ted
in c
om
plia
nce
with
th
e C
DO
W P
erm
it to
Cap
ture
and
Rel
ocat
e P
rairi
e D
ogs.
If
a re
loca
tion
site
can
not
be
loca
ted
for
prai
rie
dog
tow
ns
grea
ter
than
2 a
cres
, the
pra
irie
dogs
will
be
capt
ured
and
do
nat
ed to
rap
tor
reha
bilit
atio
n fa
cilit
ies
or tu
rned
ove
r to
the
US
FW
S fo
r th
e B
lack
-fo
ote
d fe
rret
rei
ntro
duct
ion
pro
gra
m.
A
t no
time
will
RT
D a
utho
rize
eart
hmov
ing
act
iviti
es th
at r
esu
lt in
bur
ying
live
pra
irie
dog
s.
If ne
ede
d, h
um
ane
tech
niqu
es w
ill b
e us
ed
for
killi
ng th
e pr
airi
e d
ogs.
C
DO
T p
rairi
e d
og p
olic
y is
ver
y si
mila
r an
d w
ill b
e im
plem
ente
d on
CD
OT
RO
W.
Fin
al E
nviro
nm
enta
l Im
pact
Sta
tem
ent a
nd
Sec
tion
4(f)
Eva
luat
ion
No
rth
Me
tro
Co
rrid
or
Janu
ary
2011
E
S-5
0
TAB
LE E
S-10
. PR
OPO
SED
MIT
IGA
TIO
N M
EASU
RES
— E
LEM
ENTS
OF
THE
PREF
ERR
ED A
LTER
NA
TIVE
Im
pac
t Im
pac
t T
ype
Mit
igat
ion
Mea
sure
s
Mig
rato
ry B
ird
Tre
aty
Act
(M
BT
A)
Con
stru
ctio
n
In
com
plia
nce
with
the
MB
TA
, con
stru
ctio
n a
ctiv
ities
in g
rass
lan
d, w
etla
nd,
stre
am, a
nd w
ood
lan
d ha
bita
ts, a
nd th
ose
that
occ
ur o
n b
ridg
es th
at w
ill o
ther
wis
e re
sult
in th
e ta
ke o
f mig
rato
ry b
irds,
egg
s, y
oun
g, a
nd/o
r ac
tive
nes
ts w
ill b
e av
oide
d.
T
he p
rovi
sion
s of
MB
TA
are
app
licab
le y
ear
-rou
nd;
mos
t mig
rato
ry b
ird
nest
ing
activ
ity in
eas
tern
Col
ora
do o
ccur
s du
ring
the
per
iod
of 1
Apr
il to
31
Aug
ust.
How
eve
r, s
ome
mig
rato
ry b
irds
are
kno
wn
to n
est
out
side
of t
he
prim
ary
nest
ing
seas
on.
Rap
tors
can
be
exp
ecte
d to
nes
t in
woo
dla
nd fr
om 1
Feb
ruar
y th
rou
gh 1
5 Ju
ly.
A
qua
lifie
d bi
olo
gist
will
con
duct
sur
veys
dur
ing
the
nes
ting
seas
on
prio
r to
con
stru
ctio
n to
det
erm
ine
the
pres
enc
e or
ab
senc
e of
nes
ting
mig
rato
ry b
irds.
T
hese
sur
veys
will
incl
ude
CD
OT
str
uctu
res.
W
here
pos
sibl
e, n
estin
g m
ay
be
prev
ent
ed u
ntil
cons
truc
tion
is c
ompl
ete.
T
he r
esul
ts o
f fie
ld s
urve
ys fo
r n
estin
g b
irds,
alo
ng w
ith in
form
atio
n re
gard
ing
th
e qu
alif
icat
ions
of t
he b
iolo
gis
t(s)
per
form
ing
the
surv
eys
, will
be
mai
ntai
ned
on
file
for
pote
ntia
l rev
iew
by
the
US
FW
S,
until
suc
h tim
e as
con
stru
ctio
n o
n th
e pr
opo
sed
pro
ject
has
bee
n co
mpl
ete
d.
A
qua
lifie
d bi
olo
gist
will
con
duct
rap
tor
nest
ing
surv
eys
dur
ing
an a
ppr
opr
iate
sea
son
(ge
ner
ally
1 M
ay
thro
ugh
1 Ju
ne)
to
det
erm
ine
the
pres
enc
e of
act
ive
rapt
or n
ests
. If
an a
ctiv
e ne
st is
loca
ted,
sea
son
buff
ers
will
be
esta
blis
hed
and
coor
din
ate
d w
ith C
DO
W to
pre
vent
dis
turb
ance
of n
estin
g bi
rds
dur
ing
cons
truc
tion.
T
he U
SF
WS
Col
orad
o F
ield
Offi
ce w
ill b
e co
ntac
ted
imm
edi
atel
y fo
r fu
rthe
r gu
idan
ce if
a f
ield
sur
vey
iden
tifie
s th
e ex
iste
nce
of o
ne
or m
ore
activ
e bi
rd n
ests
that
can
not b
e a
void
ed b
y th
e p
lann
ed c
onst
ruct
ion
activ
ities
. A
dher
enc
e to
th
ese
guid
elin
es
will
he
lp a
void
the
unne
cess
ary
take
of
mig
rato
ry b
irds
an
d th
e po
ssib
le n
eed
for
law
enf
orce
me
nt
actio
n.
T
he C
DO
T I-
270
brid
ge o
ver
the
O'B
rian
Ca
nal w
ill b
e su
rve
yed
for
swa
llow
s pr
ior
to c
onst
ruct
ion.
If
cons
truc
tion
is to
oc
cur
duri
ng th
e ne
stin
g se
ason
for
swal
low
s be
twee
n 1
Apr
il a
nd 3
1 A
ugus
t, al
l nes
ts w
ill b
e re
mov
ed p
rior
to 1
Apr
il an
d th
en
ever
y 3
days
unt
il co
nstr
uctio
n b
egin
s.
(Bird
s th
at b
uild
nes
ts d
urin
g co
nstr
uctio
n d
o so
of t
heir
ow
n ac
cord
an
d th
ose
nest
s w
ill n
ot n
eed
to b
e kn
ocke
d do
wn.
) If
con
stru
ctio
n b
egin
s ou
tsid
e of
the
nest
ing
seas
on, n
ests
will
not
be
kno
cked
do
wn.
F
inal
Env
iron
men
tal I
mpa
ct S
tate
men
t an
d S
ectio
n 4(
f) E
valu
atio
n
No
rth
Me
tro
Co
rrid
or
E
S-5
1 Ja
nuar
y 20
11
TAB
LE E
S-10
. PR
OPO
SED
MIT
IGA
TIO
N M
EASU
RES
— E
LEM
ENTS
OF
THE
PREF
ERR
ED A
LTER
NA
TIVE
Im
pac
t Im
pac
t T
ype
Mit
igat
ion
Mea
sure
s
Spr
ead
of N
oxi
ous
Wee
ds
Con
stru
ctio
n
An
inte
grat
ed N
oxi
ous
Wee
d M
ana
gem
ent
Pla
n w
ill b
e de
velo
ped.
T
his
plan
will
be
impl
emen
ted
duri
ng
cons
truc
tion
and
will
incl
ude
ide
ntifi
catio
n of
no
xiou
s w
eed
s in
the
area
, w
ee
d m
ana
gem
ent
goal
s a
nd o
bje
ctiv
es, a
nd p
reve
ntiv
e a
nd c
ont
rol
met
hods
. P
reve
ntiv
e m
eas
ures
incl
ude
the
follo
win
g:
C
ontr
acto
rs’ v
ehi
cles
will
be
insp
ecte
d b
efor
e th
ey
are
use
d fo
r co
nstr
uctio
n to
ens
ure
the
y ar
e fr
ee
of s
oil a
nd
debr
is
capa
ble
of tr
ansp
ortin
g no
xiou
s w
eed
se
eds
or r
oots
.
N
oxi
ous
we
eds
obse
rve
d in
and
ne
ar th
e co
nstr
uctio
n ar
ea a
t the
sta
rt o
f con
stru
ctio
n w
ill b
e tr
eate
d w
ith h
erb
icid
es o
r ph
ysic
ally
rem
oved
to p
reve
nt s
eeds
blo
win
g in
to d
istu
rbe
d ar
eas
dur
ing
cons
truc
tion.
N
oxi
ous
we
eds
iden
tifie
d d
urin
g co
nstr
uctio
n w
ill b
e id
entif
ied
and
trea
ted.
P
oten
tial a
reas
of t
opso
il sa
lvag
e w
ill b
e as
sess
ed fo
r pr
esen
ce a
nd a
bun
danc
e of
no
xio
us w
ee
ds p
rior
to s
alva
ge.
T
opso
il fr
om h
eavi
ly in
fest
ed a
reas
will
be
trea
ted
by
spra
ying
, tak
ing
the
tops
oil
off-
site
, or
by
bury
ing
the
tops
oil
dur
ing
cons
truc
tion.
A
reas
of t
empo
rary
dis
turb
ance
will
be
recl
aim
ed in
pha
ses
thro
ugho
ut th
e pr
ojec
t con
stru
ctio
n an
d se
ed
ed u
sing
a
perm
ane
nt n
ativ
e se
ed m
ixtu
re.
If ar
eas
are
com
plet
e an
d pe
rma
nent
se
edi
ng
can
not o
ccur
due
to th
e tim
e of
yea
r,
mul
ch a
nd m
ulch
tack
ifier
will
be
use
d fo
r te
mpo
rary
ero
sio
n co
ntro
l unt
il se
edin
g ca
n oc
cur.
O
nly
cert
ified
we
ed-
free
mul
ch a
nd b
ale
s w
ill b
e us
ed in
the
proj
ect s
tud
y ar
ea.
W
eed
cont
rol w
ill u
se th
e pr
inci
ples
of i
nte
gra
ted
pest
ma
nag
emen
t to
trea
t tar
get
we
ed
spec
ies
effic
ient
ly a
nd
effe
ctiv
ely
by
usi
ng a
com
bin
atio
n of
tw
o or
mor
e m
anag
em
ent t
echn
iqu
es (
bio
log
ical
, ch
emic
al, m
echa
nic
al, a
nd/o
r cu
ltura
l).
Wee
d-co
ntro
l met
hod
s w
ill b
e se
lect
ed b
ase
d on
the
man
age
me
nt g
oal f
or th
e sp
ecie
s, th
e na
ture
of t
he
exis
ting
envi
ronm
ent,
and
me
thod
s re
com
men
ded
by
Col
orad
o w
ee
d e
xpe
rts.
The
pre
senc
e of
impo
rta
nt w
ildlif
e ha
bita
t or
T&
E s
peci
es w
ill b
e co
nsid
ere
d w
hen
ch
oosi
ng c
ont
rol m
eth
ods.
Impa
cts
to A
quat
ic H
abita
ts
Con
stru
ctio
n
B
MP
s w
ill b
e u
sed
to c
ontr
ol e
rosi
on a
nd
sedi
me
ntat
ion
durin
g co
nstr
uctio
n an
d to
pro
tect
wat
er q
ualit
y in
str
eam
s.
BM
Ps
ma
y in
clud
e b
erm
s, b
rush
bar
rier
s, c
heck
dam
s, e
rosi
on c
ontr
ol b
lan
kets
, filt
er s
trip
s, s
andb
ag
barr
iers
, sed
imen
t ba
sins
, she
et m
ulch
ing,
silt
fenc
es, s
tra
w-b
ale
bar
riers
, su
rfac
e ro
ughe
ning
, and
/or
dive
rsio
n ch
ann
els.
A
spi
ll pr
eve
ntio
n an
d e
mer
genc
y re
spon
se p
lan
will
be
prep
ared
and
use
d d
urin
g co
nstr
uctio
n, fo
r st
orag
e a
nd th
e ha
ndl
ing
and
use
of c
hem
ical
s, fu
els,
and
sim
ilar
pro
duc
ts.
S
ee S
ectio
n 3.
10.2
, Wat
er R
eso
urce
s a
nd W
ater
Qua
lity.
Impa
cts
to S
peci
al S
tatu
s S
peci
es –
Bur
row
ing
Ow
ls
Con
stru
ctio
n
CD
OW
rec
omm
end
atio
ns fo
r su
rve
ys a
nd p
rote
ctio
n of
ne
stin
g bu
rro
win
g o
wls
(st
ate-
liste
d th
reat
ene
d) w
ill b
e fo
llow
ed
:
S
urve
ys w
ill b
e c
ondu
cte
d pr
ior
to c
onst
ruct
ion
to d
eter
min
e pr
ese
nce
of b
urro
win
g o
wls
in p
rairi
e do
g to
wns
and
the
loca
tions
of o
ccup
ied
nes
ts.
Sur
veys
will
be
con
duct
ed
for
any
cons
truc
tion
activ
ities
in s
uita
ble
hab
itat f
rom
15
Mar
ch
to 3
1 O
ctob
er.
C
onst
ruct
ion
will
be
avoi
ded
with
in 1
50 fe
et o
f bur
row
s us
ed
by
burr
ow
ing
ow
ls fr
om 1
5 M
arch
to 3
1 O
ctob
er.
Dep
letio
n of
the
Pla
tte R
iver
S
yste
m
Con
stru
ctio
n an
d O
pera
tion
s C
ontin
ued
coor
dina
tion
with
US
FW
S o
n S
ectio
n 7
ES
A c
onsu
ltatio
n an
d th
e re
quire
men
ts fo
r th
e P
latte
Riv
er R
ecov
ery
Impl
emen
tatio
n P
lan.
Fin
al E
nviro
nm
enta
l Im
pact
Sta
tem
ent a
nd
Sec
tion
4(f)
Eva
luat
ion
No
rth
Me
tro
Co
rrid
or
Janu
ary
2011
E
S-5
2
TAB
LE E
S-10
. PR
OPO
SED
MIT
IGA
TIO
N M
EASU
RES
— E
LEM
ENTS
OF
THE
PREF
ERR
ED A
LTER
NA
TIVE
Im
pac
t Im
pac
t T
ype
Mit
igat
ion
Mea
sure
s
Min
eral
Res
ou
rces
, Geo
log
y, a
nd
So
ils
Ero
sio
n an
d/or
Agg
rada
tion
C
onst
ruct
ion;
A
lso
Ope
ratio
ns
If N
ot P
rope
rly
Miti
gate
d D
urin
g C
onst
ruct
ion
T
he fo
llow
ing
mea
sure
s w
ill b
e im
ple
me
nte
d to
miti
gate
for
pote
ntia
l ero
sion
and
/or
agg
rada
tion
wh
ere
app
lica
ble
and
prac
ticab
le: d
rain
age
syst
ems
to d
irect
sur
face
wat
er a
nd r
unof
f, sl
ope
desi
gn, c
over
ed s
lope
s du
ring
cons
truc
tion,
en
gin
eer
ed
fill,
and
prom
pt a
nd
appr
opri
ate
reve
get
atio
n.
Loss
of O
ppor
tuni
ty to
Ext
ract
M
iner
al R
esou
rces
C
onst
ruct
ion
and
Ope
ratio
ns
Le
gal
ana
lysi
s w
ill b
e co
ndu
cted
of t
he p
roje
ct’s
impa
cts
on m
iner
al r
ight
s an
d e
xist
ing
ext
ract
ive
activ
ity fo
r sa
nd/g
rave
l an
d o
il/g
as.
P
roje
ct c
omp
one
nts
will
be
site
d w
ithin
the
railr
oad
RO
W o
r w
her
e qu
arry
ing
has
been
co
mpl
ete
d to
the
exte
nt
prac
tica
ble.
Inte
rfer
ence
with
Ope
ratio
n of
E
xist
ing
Min
eral
Ext
ract
ion
Ope
ratio
ns
Con
stru
ctio
n an
d O
pera
tion
s
RT
D w
ill c
oor
dina
te w
ith o
wn
ers
to m
inim
ize
proj
ect i
mpa
cts
on e
xist
ing
ext
ract
ion
ope
ratio
ns (
i.e.,
sand
/gra
vel a
nd
oil/g
as).
A
cur
b cu
t off
the
imp
acte
d ac
cess
roa
d of
a p
rod
ucin
g w
ell
at th
e S
H 7
/16
2nd A
venu
e S
tatio
n to
the
bus
loop
of t
he
stat
ion
are
a w
ill b
e pr
ovid
ed
to a
llow
con
tinu
ed a
cces
s to
the
we
ll.
Wat
er R
eso
urc
es a
nd
Wat
er Q
ual
ity
Gro
und
wa
ter
De
wat
erin
g
Con
stru
ctio
n
D
isch
arge
will
be
into
nea
rby
stor
m s
ew
er
in a
ccor
dan
ce w
ith th
e di
sch
arg
e pe
rmit.
C
onta
min
ate
d de
wat
erin
g w
ater
will
be
trea
ted
and
dis
char
ged
in a
ccor
dan
ce w
ith d
isch
arge
per
mit
obta
ined
thro
ugh
CD
PH
E a
nd C
DN
R.
W
ater
sup
ply
redu
ced
from
the
pum
pin
g of
de
wat
erin
g w
ells
will
be
augm
ente
d u
nder
Col
orad
o la
w.
Gro
und
wa
ter
Qua
lity
Con
stru
ctio
n an
d O
pera
tion
s
All
port
ions
of t
he P
refe
rre
d A
ltern
ativ
e, in
clu
din
g th
e co
nstr
uctio
n p
hase
, will
incl
ude
BM
Ps
that
will
act
to im
prov
e w
ater
qu
alit
y fr
om c
urr
ent c
ond
ition
s. T
hese
BM
Ps
are
requ
ired
by
RT
D, t
he lo
cal j
uris
dict
ion,
and
the
Sta
te o
f Col
orad
o.
Pos
sibl
e R
emo
val o
f Wat
er
Sup
ply
or
Mon
itorin
g In
fras
truc
ture
in th
e P
roje
ct
Foo
tprin
t
Con
stru
ctio
n
A
ctiv
e w
ells
that
are
rem
ove
d fo
r th
e P
refe
rred
Alte
rnat
ive
will
be
rep
lace
d as
par
t of t
he P
refe
rred
Alte
rnat
ive.
O
pera
tiona
l mon
itori
ng a
nd s
upp
ly w
ells
tha
t ar
e in
dire
ctly
impa
cted
will
eith
er b
e re
pla
ced
in th
e sa
me
or s
imila
r lo
catio
ns, d
epe
ndin
g o
n th
e si
te c
ond
itio
ns, o
r w
ill b
e m
onito
red
for
chan
ges
to w
ater
qua
lity
and
sup
ply
dur
ing
cons
truc
tion
and
oper
atio
n.
N
on-o
pera
tion
al m
onito
ring
and
sup
ply
we
lls w
ill b
e ab
and
one
d in
acc
orda
nce
with
sta
te r
equ
irem
ent
s.
T
he w
ater
sup
ply
rese
rvoi
r im
pact
is a
red
uctio
n of
5.6
acr
e-fe
et in
sto
rag
e ca
paci
ty fo
r th
e M
iller
res
ervo
ir.
Thi
s im
pact
is
less
than
0.2
7% o
f the
20
80 a
cre-
feet
of
stor
age
in M
iller
res
ervo
ir, a
nd 0
.000
8% o
f the
nea
rly
700
,00
0 ac
re fe
et o
f to
tal s
tora
ge fo
r D
enve
r W
ater
. T
his
loss
of s
tora
ge is
exp
ecte
d to
be
miti
gat
ed th
rou
gh p
aym
ent t
o D
enve
r W
ater
at a
ne
got
iate
d pr
ice
per
acre
-fo
ot a
nd/o
r fin
al e
ngi
nee
ring
to p
ote
ntia
lly r
educ
e th
e lo
ss o
f sto
rage
.
F
inal
Env
iron
men
tal I
mpa
ct S
tate
men
t an
d S
ectio
n 4(
f) E
valu
atio
n
No
rth
Me
tro
Co
rrid
or
E
S-5
3 Ja
nuar
y 20
11
TAB
LE E
S-10
. PR
OPO
SED
MIT
IGA
TIO
N M
EASU
RES
— E
LEM
ENTS
OF
THE
PREF
ERR
ED A
LTER
NA
TIVE
Im
pac
t Im
pac
t T
ype
Mit
igat
ion
Mea
sure
s
Sur
face
Wat
er Q
ualit
y of
S
trea
ms
and
Lak
es, a
nd P
ublic
W
ater
Sup
ply
Fac
ilitie
s
Con
stru
ctio
n an
d O
pera
tion
s
Whe
re d
irec
t im
pact
s w
ill o
ccur
with
in th
e no
rmal
hig
h w
ate
r m
ark
of a
wat
erbo
dy,
cof
fer
pilin
gs o
r ot
her
sep
arat
ion
tech
niqu
es w
ill b
e co
nstr
ucte
d a
nd m
aint
aine
d to
isol
ate
the
exca
vatio
n fr
om
the
rest
of t
he w
ate
rbod
y.
W
ater
qua
lity
mon
itori
ng b
efor
e, d
urin
g, a
nd
afte
r co
nstr
uct
ion
is r
ecom
men
ded
for
pere
nnia
l wat
erb
odi
es th
at a
re
dire
ctly
imp
acte
d.
T
he s
torm
wat
er
miti
gatio
n re
qui
red
will
be
suffi
cien
t to
miti
gat
e su
rfac
e w
ater
bodi
es in
the
indi
rect
impa
ct a
rea,
and
for
dire
ct im
pact
s to
inte
rmitt
ent
or s
ome
eph
emer
al w
ater
bodi
es.
A
ll of
the
mea
sure
s lis
ted
for
Sto
rmw
ater
Qu
ality
an
d S
pills
will
be
follo
we
d.
T
he te
mpo
rary
loss
of s
tora
ge in
Mill
er R
eser
voir
duri
ng c
on
stru
ctio
n ca
n b
e m
itiga
ted
thro
ugh
the
use
of
coffe
r da
ms
or
by
dra
win
g d
ow
n th
e re
serv
oir
and
cons
truc
ting
wh
en th
ere
is lo
w d
eman
d fo
r th
e st
orag
e (
i.e.
win
ter)
. T
he p
ote
ntia
l im
pact
s to
the
qua
lity
of th
e w
ater
dur
ing
con
stru
ctio
n w
ill b
e m
itiga
ted
thro
ugh
the
use
of
coffe
r da
ms
to p
rote
ct th
e w
ater
sup
ply
and
/or
thro
ugh
use
of s
peci
al e
quip
men
t and
pro
cedu
res
for
wo
rkin
g in
wat
er.
Pot
entia
l im
pact
s to
wat
er
qua
lity
duri
ng o
pera
tion
in M
iller
Res
ervo
ir ar
e e
xpec
ted
to m
itiga
ted
thro
ugh
ret
entio
n p
ond
inst
alla
tion
and
rout
ing
of
stor
mw
ater
to th
em to
con
tain
sto
rm fl
ow
s fr
om
the
trac
k ar
ea.
D
urin
g pr
oje
ct c
onst
ruct
ion
in C
DO
T R
OW
are
as, c
ompl
y w
ith th
e C
DO
T W
ater
Qua
lity
Con
sent
Dec
ree,
wh
ich
wa
s is
sue
d to
CD
OT
by
CD
PH
E (
effe
ctiv
e Ja
nua
ry 2
009
).
Sto
rmw
ater
Qu
ality
C
onst
ruct
ion
and
Ope
ratio
ns
T
empo
rary
co
nst
ruct
ion
BM
Ps,
suc
h as
see
d, m
ulch
, em
ban
kmen
t pro
tect
ors
, gra
de te
chn
iqu
es, i
nlet
pro
tect
ion,
silt
fe
nces
, an
d ve
hicl
e tr
acki
ng p
reve
ntio
n w
ill b
e us
ed a
nd m
ain
tain
ed fo
r co
nstr
uctio
n ac
tiviti
es a
s re
qui
red
by
the
law
s an
d re
gula
tion
s fo
r th
e lo
catio
n.
P
erm
anen
t BM
Ps,
suc
h as
ext
end
ed d
eten
tion
basi
ns, g
rass
buf
fers
, and
gra
ss s
wa
les
for
the
stat
ions
, pa
rtic
ular
ly
104th
Ave
nue
Sta
tion,
will
be
cons
truc
ted
an
d m
aint
ain
ed
as
requ
ired
by
the
law
s an
d re
gula
tions
for
the
loca
tion.
S
torm
wat
er r
uno
ff is
hig
hly
re
gula
ted
dur
ing
cons
truc
tion
and
oper
atio
n.
By
des
igni
ng
the
BM
P a
ccor
din
g to
RT
D a
nd
loca
l crit
eria
, and
with
the
acq
uisi
tion
of a
ppr
opri
ate
perm
its fr
om th
e lo
cal j
uris
dict
ions
, no
add
ition
al m
itiga
tion
is
requ
ired.
P
roje
ct-s
pec
ific
wat
er q
ualit
y p
lans
will
be
deve
lope
d.
P
roje
ct-s
pec
ific
stor
mw
ater
man
age
me
nt p
lans
will
be
deve
lope
d.
Spi
lls
Con
stru
ctio
n an
d O
pera
tion
s
Spi
ll P
reve
ntio
n, C
ontr
ol, a
nd
Cou
nter
mea
sure
Pla
n w
ill b
e fo
llow
ed.
S
pill
cont
rols
will
be
impl
emen
ted.
Fin
al E
nviro
nm
enta
l Im
pact
Sta
tem
ent a
nd
Sec
tion
4(f)
Eva
luat
ion
No
rth
Me
tro
Co
rrid
or
Janu
ary
2011
E
S-5
4
TAB
LE E
S-10
. PR
OPO
SED
MIT
IGA
TIO
N M
EASU
RES
— E
LEM
ENTS
OF
THE
PREF
ERR
ED A
LTER
NA
TIVE
Im
pac
t Im
pac
t T
ype
Mit
igat
ion
Mea
sure
s
Wet
lan
ds
and
Oth
er W
ater
s
Loss
of W
etla
nds
Due
to th
e P
lace
men
t of D
red
ged
or F
ill
Mat
eria
l
Con
stru
ctio
n
A
dher
e to
the
miti
gatio
n re
qui
rem
ents
as
spec
ifie
d in
the
404
CW
A p
erm
it, (
likel
y to
be
an
ind
ivid
ual p
erm
it).
M
itiga
tion
for
wet
lan
d im
pact
s w
ill in
itia
lly b
e so
ught
on-
site
. In
the
even
t tha
t sui
tab
le o
n-si
te m
itiga
tion
is in
feas
ible
, cr
edits
will
be
purc
has
ed fr
om
a w
etla
nd
bank
.
F
or a
ny
we
tlan
ds o
n C
DO
T R
OW
, w
het
her
juris
dict
ion
al o
r no
n-ju
risdi
ctio
nal
, a W
etla
nd F
indi
ng R
epor
t sha
ll be
pr
epar
ed fo
r C
DO
T r
evie
w a
nd
appr
oval
. A
ll im
pact
ed w
etla
nds
on
CD
OT
RO
W s
hall
be m
itiga
ted.
W
etla
nd a
reas
des
igna
ted
as a
reas
of t
emp
ora
ry d
istu
rban
ce t
o be
use
d fo
r co
nstr
uctio
n ac
cess
will
be
cove
red
with
ge
ote
xtile
, str
aw,
and
soi
l, or
con
stru
ctio
n m
attin
g pr
ior
to u
se.
T
he lo
catio
n a
nd d
esig
n of
an
y te
mpo
rary
cro
ssin
g of
an
y w
ater
feat
ures
will
be
appr
ove
d b
y th
e U
SA
CE
.
Unn
eces
sary
and
Un
pla
nned
W
etla
nd Im
pact
s C
onst
ruct
ion
Prio
r to
con
stru
ctio
n, o
ran
ge t
empo
rary
fenc
e an
d se
dim
ent-
cont
rol m
easu
res
will
be
pla
ced
to p
rote
ct e
xist
ing
wet
lan
ds
that
are
out
sid
e th
e pl
ann
ed a
rea
of d
istu
rban
ce.
T
he lo
catio
n a
nd d
esig
n of
sto
rmw
ater
pon
ds
will
be
coor
din
ated
with
the
US
AC
E.
Sed
imen
tatio
n an
d E
rosi
on
of
Wet
land
s a
nd O
ther
Wat
er
Fea
ture
s
Con
stru
ctio
n
B
MP
s w
ill b
e im
plem
ent
ed d
urin
g al
l pha
ses
of c
onst
ruct
ion
to r
educ
e im
pact
s fr
om s
edim
enta
tion
and
eros
ion,
in
clu
ding
the
use
of b
erm
s, b
rush
bar
rier
s, c
heck
dam
s, e
rosi
on
cont
rol b
lank
ets,
filte
r st
rips,
san
dba
g b
arrie
rs, s
edim
ent
ba
sins
, si
lt fe
nces
, st
raw
-bal
e b
arrie
rs,
surf
ace
rou
ghe
nin
g, a
nd/o
r di
vers
ion
cha
nnel
s.
W
hen
prac
tica
ble,
con
stru
ctio
n in
wat
erw
ays
will
occ
ur d
urin
g lo
w-f
low
or
dry
per
iods
.
F
low
ing
wat
er w
ill b
e di
vert
ed a
roun
d ac
tive
cons
truc
tion
area
s.
N
o fil
l mat
eria
l will
be
stor
ed in
we
tland
s or
oth
er w
ate
r fe
atur
es.
N
o un
perm
itte
d di
sch
arge
s w
ill b
e al
low
ed.
Con
tam
inat
ion
of W
etla
nds
an
d O
ther
Wat
er F
eatu
res
C
onst
ruct
ion
and
Ope
ratio
ns
T
here
will
be
no
equ
ipm
ent
sta
ging
, mat
eria
ls s
tora
ge, c
hem
ical
use
(e.
g., s
oil s
tabi
lizer
s, d
ust i
nhib
itors
, an
d fe
rtili
zers
),
or e
quip
me
nt r
efue
ling
with
in 5
0 fe
et o
f w
etla
nds
or o
ther
wat
er fe
atur
es.
A
ny
new
or
mo
difie
d br
idge
s w
ill b
e de
sign
ed
to m
inim
ize
dire
ct d
isch
arge
of s
torm
wat
er r
unof
f int
o w
etla
nds.
Flo
od
pla
ins,
Dra
inag
e, a
nd
Hyd
rolo
gy
Flo
odpl
ain
Imp
acts
D
esig
n
F
lood
pla
in m
ana
gem
ent
will
be
coor
din
ated
with
loca
l jur
isdi
ctio
ns a
nd
the
UD
FC
D.
Con
stru
ctio
n A
ctiv
ities
with
in
Flo
odpl
ain
C
onst
ruct
ion
Con
stru
ctio
n a
ctiv
ities
will
ad
here
to lo
cal j
uris
dict
ion
and
UD
FC
D r
equi
rem
ents
.
Haz
ard
ou
s M
ater
ials
Pot
entia
l Im
pact
to R
emed
iatio
n S
yste
m a
t Sun
cor
Ene
rgy
(U.S
.A.)
Inc
.
Con
stru
ctio
n (T
empo
rary
)
Impa
cts
to th
e sl
urry
wa
ll an
d gr
ound
wat
er b
arrie
r sy
stem
at
Sun
cor
Ene
rgy
(U.S
.A.)
Inc
. will
be
avo
ide
d.
F
inal
Env
iron
men
tal I
mpa
ct S
tate
men
t an
d S
ectio
n 4(
f) E
valu
atio
n
No
rth
Me
tro
Co
rrid
or
E
S-5
5 Ja
nuar
y 20
11
TAB
LE E
S-10
. PR
OPO
SED
MIT
IGA
TIO
N M
EASU
RES
— E
LEM
ENTS
OF
THE
PREF
ERR
ED A
LTER
NA
TIVE
Im
pac
t Im
pac
t T
ype
Mit
igat
ion
Mea
sure
s
Con
tam
inat
ed
Soi
l and
/or
Gro
und
wa
ter
at
Haz
ardo
us
Mat
eria
l Site
s w
ithin
or
Adj
acen
t to
Are
as fo
r A
cqui
sitio
n or
E
xcav
atio
n
Con
stru
ctio
n (T
empo
rary
)
A
Pha
se I
ES
A fo
r si
tes
acqu
ired
, and
a P
hase
II E
SA
for
site
s th
at m
ay
ha
ve c
onta
min
atio
n or
are
impa
cted
(as
do
cum
ente
d in
the
Pha
se I
ES
A)
will
be
com
plet
ed.
A
site
inve
stig
atio
n pl
an fo
r sa
mpl
ing
and
anal
ysis
will
be
dev
elop
ed
wh
ere
exc
avat
ion
or p
rope
rty
acq
uisi
tion
occu
rs.
A
mat
eria
ls h
and
ling
pla
n w
ill b
e de
velo
ped
to a
ddre
ss c
onta
min
ated
soi
l and
gro
und
wat
er.
E
ngin
eeri
ng
cont
rols
will
be
det
erm
ined
to m
inim
ize
quan
tity
of c
onta
min
ated
mat
eria
ls.
R
esp
onsi
ble
par
ties
will
be
det
erm
ined
for
the
desi
gn,
bui
ldin
g, a
nd o
pera
tion
of r
eme
diat
ion
syst
ems.
C
ost r
ecov
ery
of h
azar
dou
s m
ater
ial s
ites
wh
ere
rem
ova
l act
ions
an
d lo
ng-t
erm
mai
nte
nanc
e is
req
uire
d w
ill b
e de
term
ined
.
A
hea
vy-m
eta
l-ba
sed
pain
t su
rve
y w
ill b
e pr
epa
red
for
brid
ges
and
bui
ldin
gs
in th
e pr
ojec
t im
pact
are
a.
A
n as
best
os s
urve
y w
ill b
e pr
epar
ed in
the
eve
nt o
f bui
ldin
g a
nd s
truc
ture
acq
uis
itio
n or
dem
oliti
on, o
r if
asbe
stos
is
kno
wn
to b
e pr
esen
t.
S
oil c
har
acte
rizat
ion
and
ma
nag
emen
t pla
ns
will
be
prep
ared
acc
ordi
ng
to N
atio
nal F
ire A
cade
my
and
HM
WM
D if
co
nstr
uctio
n de
bris
is e
ncou
nter
ed d
urin
g ac
tiviti
es a
nd is
su
spec
ted
to c
ont
ain
asbe
stos
.
Wat
er Q
ualit
y P
rote
ctio
n
Con
stru
ctio
n (T
empo
rary
)
Con
stru
ctio
n B
MP
s w
ill b
e im
plem
ente
d in
acc
orda
nce
with
a S
torm
wat
er P
ollu
tion
Pre
vent
ion
Pla
n.
BM
Ps
ma
y in
clu
de
seco
ndar
y co
ntai
nmen
t are
as fo
r re
fuel
ing
cons
truc
tion
equi
pmen
t, be
rms
or p
onds
to c
ontr
ol r
unof
f, an
d a
mon
itori
ng
prog
ram
to te
st s
torm
wat
er fo
r co
ntam
inan
ts p
rior
to d
isch
arge
from
the
cons
truc
tion
site
.
Pro
tect
ion
of C
onst
ruct
ion
Wor
kers
C
onst
ruct
ion
(Tem
pora
ry)
C
onst
ruct
ion
prac
tices
in c
ompl
ianc
e w
ith O
SH
A r
equi
rem
ents
will
be
used
for
cons
truc
tion
wor
kers
who
ma
y be
ex
pose
d to
haz
ardo
us m
ater
ials
. H
ealth
an
d sa
fety
, em
erge
ncy
resp
ons
e, a
nd a
ir m
onito
ring
(if
nece
ssar
y) p
lans
will
be
pr
epar
ed, a
nd p
rovi
sion
s fo
r p
erso
nal
pro
tect
ive
equi
pmen
t w
ill b
e pr
ovid
ed.
Saf
ety
and
Sec
uri
ty
Pot
entia
l Im
pact
to E
mer
genc
y R
esp
onse
Tim
es D
urin
g C
onst
ruct
ion
Con
stru
ctio
n
T
raffi
c co
ntro
l pla
ns fo
r co
nstr
uctio
n w
ill b
e de
velo
ped
by
the
cont
ract
or.
Sec
urity
Haz
ards
at
Con
stru
ctio
n S
ite
Con
stru
ctio
n
C
onst
ruct
ion
area
s w
ill b
e se
cure
d.
Saf
ety
and
Sec
urity
of P
atro
ns
Ope
ratio
ns
T
he R
TD
des
ign
guid
elin
es a
nd
Saf
ety
and
Sec
urity
Man
ual w
ill b
e ad
here
d to
.
C
oord
inat
ion
with
the
Fire
an
d L
ife S
afet
y C
om
mitt
ee to
pre
pare
em
erge
ncy
plan
s w
ill c
on
tinue
.
F
enci
ng
or b
arri
ers
alon
g th
e al
ignm
ent
and
sta
tion
are
as w
ill b
e in
stal
led
to h
elp
prev
ent t
resp
assi
ng o
n th
e tr
ackw
ay.
Uti
litie
s
Adj
ustm
ent
or
Rel
ocat
ion
of
Irrig
atio
n D
itch
es
Con
stru
ctio
n
C
onst
ruct
ion
will
be
sche
dul
ed
duri
ng p
erio
ds
of n
on-u
se o
r lo
w-u
se (
Nov
em
ber
to M
arch
).
D
esig
n w
ill b
e m
odifi
ed to
avo
id/m
inim
ize
conf
lict.
Fin
al E
nviro
nm
enta
l Im
pact
Sta
tem
ent a
nd
Sec
tion
4(f)
Eva
luat
ion
No
rth
Me
tro
Co
rrid
or
Janu
ary
2011
E
S-5
6
TAB
LE E
S-10
. PR
OPO
SED
MIT
IGA
TIO
N M
EASU
RES
— E
LEM
ENTS
OF
THE
PREF
ERR
ED A
LTER
NA
TIVE
Im
pac
t Im
pac
t T
ype
Mit
igat
ion
Mea
sure
s
Rel
ocat
ion
of E
lect
ric
Tra
nsm
issi
on T
ow
ers
Con
stru
ctio
n
C
onst
ruct
ion
will
be
sche
dul
ed
durin
g p
erio
ds
of lo
w u
se (
Oct
ober
to A
pril)
.
D
esig
n w
ill b
e m
odifi
ed to
avo
id/m
inim
ize
conf
lict.
P
rote
ct in
pla
ce.
Adj
ustm
ent
or
Rel
ocat
ion
of
Hig
h-P
ress
ure
Gas
Lin
e(s)
C
onst
ruct
ion
Con
stru
ctio
n w
ill b
e sc
hed
ule
d du
ring
per
iod
s of
low
use
(M
ay
to S
ept
emb
er).
D
esig
n w
ill b
e m
odifi
ed to
avo
id/m
inim
ize
conf
lict.
Adj
ustm
ent
or
Rel
ocat
ion
of
Bur
ied
Fib
er O
ptic
C
onst
ruct
ion
Ear
ly c
oord
inat
ion
with
util
ity o
wn
ers
will
be
com
plet
ed.
D
esig
n w
ill b
e m
odifi
ed to
avo
id/m
inim
ize
conf
lict.
P
rote
ct in
pla
ce.
V
aria
nce
to m
inim
um d
epth
req
uire
me
nt w
ill b
e ob
tain
ed.
Adj
ustm
ent
or
Rel
ocat
ion
of
Wat
er L
ines
, San
itary
Se
we
rs
Con
stru
ctio
n
D
esig
n w
ill b
e m
odifi
ed to
avo
id c
onfli
ct.
D
isru
ptio
n of
ser
vice
for
low
-use
per
iod
(Oct
ober
to A
pril)
will
be
sche
dul
ed.
D
isru
ptio
n of
ser
vice
with
wet
tie-
in w
ill b
e m
inim
ized
.
Rel
ocat
ion
of S
torm
Se
we
rs
Con
stru
ctio
n
D
esig
n w
ill b
e m
odifi
ed to
avo
id/m
inim
ize
conf
lict.
Ne
w R
oad
wa
y, R
etai
nin
g W
alls
, or
Add
ition
al/R
educ
ed C
over
on
Bur
ied
Util
ities
Con
stru
ctio
n
A
n en
case
me
nt
or p
rote
ctiv
e co
ver
will
be
add
ed
over
util
ities
(pr
otec
t in
pla
ce).
Rel
ocat
ion
of O
verh
ead
Tel
epho
ne
and
Ele
ctric
D
istr
ibut
ion
Lin
es
Con
stru
ctio
n
E
arly
coo
rdin
atio
n w
ith u
tility
ow
ner
s w
ill b
e co
mpl
eted
.
Sec
tio
n 4
(f)
AR
CH
AE
OL
OG
ICA
L A
ND
HIS
TO
RIC
RE
SO
UR
CE
S
S
ee m
itig
atio
n lis
ted
und
er C
hap
ter
7, A
rcha
eolo
gica
l and
His
toric
.
PA
RK
LA
ND
S A
ND
RE
CR
EA
TIO
NA
L R
ES
OU
RC
ES
S
ee m
itig
atio
n lis
ted
und
er C
hap
ter
7, P
arkl
and
s an
d R
ecre
atio
n A
reas
.
Sec
tio
n 6
(f)
S
outh
Pla
tte R
iver
Tra
il (F
irst C
ross
ing)
: No
Sec
tion
6(f)
Con
vers
ion
Due
to N
ew
B
ridg
e P
ier
in G
reen
wa
y
Con
stru
ctio
n an
d O
pera
tion
s
No
miti
gat
ion
requ
ired
und
er S
ectio
n 6(
f).
Tra
nsi
t S
ervi
ce
and
Op
erat
ion
s
N
o ad
vers
e im
pact
s.
F
inal
Env
iron
men
tal I
mpa
ct S
tate
men
t an
d S
ectio
n 4(
f) E
valu
atio
n
No
rth
Me
tro
Co
rrid
or
E
S-5
7 Ja
nuar
y 20
11
TAB
LE E
S-10
. PR
OPO
SED
MIT
IGA
TIO
N M
EASU
RES
— E
LEM
ENTS
OF
THE
PREF
ERR
ED A
LTER
NA
TIVE
Im
pac
t Im
pac
t T
ype
Mit
igat
ion
Mea
sure
s
Sta
tio
n A
rea
Ro
adw
ay a
nd
Inte
rsec
tio
n
Sta
tio
n
Mit
igat
ion
The
Pre
ferr
ed S
tatio
n O
ptio
ns
Wou
ld R
equ
ire S
igna
lizat
ion
and
the
Add
itio
n of
Tur
n La
ne
s at
Som
e A
djac
ent S
tatio
n A
rea
Inte
rsec
tions
to
Add
ress
Tra
ffic
Impa
cts
Con
stru
ctio
n an
d O
pera
tion
s N
atio
nal W
este
rn S
tock
S
how
(D
enve
r)
N
o st
atio
n-re
late
d m
itig
atio
n m
easu
res
req
uire
d.
72n
d A
venu
e
(Com
mer
ce C
ity)
72
nd A
venu
e/C
olor
ado
Bou
leva
rd (
Sta
tion
Acc
ess)
: -
Sig
nal
ize
the
inte
rsec
tion
(202
0 op
eni
ng d
ay)
.
U
S 6
-85/
74th
Ave
nue:
-
Res
trip
e bo
th e
astb
ound
lane
s in
to le
ft-tu
rn la
nes
and
cons
truc
t a fr
ee r
ight
-tur
n la
ne
on
the
sout
h si
de o
f 74th
Ave
nue
(203
5 or
soo
ner,
whe
n cr
itica
l mov
eme
nt b
ecom
es L
OS
F).
88th
Ave
nue
(T
horn
ton)
88th
Ave
nue/
Dev
onsh
ire B
oule
vard
-
Rec
ons
truc
t the
nor
thb
ound
app
roac
h w
ith o
ne n
orth
boun
d rig
ht-
and
two
nort
hbou
nd
left-
turn
lan
es.
Sta
rt th
e ta
per
into
the
adde
d tu
rn la
nes
just
nor
th o
f Dev
on
shire
Cou
rt.
Impr
ovem
ent
s w
oul
d be
with
in th
e e
xist
ing
righ
t-of
-wa
y (2
020
op
enin
g d
ay)
.
W
elb
y R
oad
/Sta
tion
Acc
ess:
-
Rec
ons
truc
t w
ith a
nor
thb
oun
d le
ft-tu
rn la
ne
and
sign
aliz
e th
e in
ters
ectio
n (2
035
or
soon
er,
wh
en
criti
cal m
ovem
ent
bec
omes
LO
S F
).
104th
Ave
nue
(T
horn
ton)
104th
Ave
nue
/Fox
Run
Par
kwa
y:
- C
onst
ruct
a s
eco
nd n
orth
bou
nd le
ft-tu
rn la
ne.
Shi
ft so
uthb
oun
d rig
ht-t
urn
lan
e to
the
wes
t so
that
the
thro
ugh
lan
es a
lign
(20
20 o
peni
ng
da
y)
C
olor
ado
Bou
leva
rd/1
04th
Ave
nue:
-
Con
stru
ct a
no
rthb
ound
rig
ht-t
urn
lane
(2
020
ope
nin
g da
y).
C
olor
ado
Bou
leva
rd/S
ervi
ce R
oad
(Eas
t Sta
tion
Acc
ess)
: -
Rec
ons
truc
t the
cur
rent
rig
ht-i
n/rig
ht-o
ut in
ters
ectio
n to
pro
vide
a s
igna
lize
d fu
ll m
ovem
ent
thre
e-le
g in
ters
ectio
n w
ith a
n ea
stbo
und
left-
turn
lan
e an
d a
nort
hbo
und
left-
turn
lan
e (2
020
ope
nin
g d
ay)
.
C
olor
ado
Bou
leva
rd/S
out
h S
tatio
n A
cces
s:
- C
onst
ruct
a n
ew
uns
igna
lize
d th
ree-
quar
ter
mov
eme
nt in
ters
ectio
n, w
ith n
orth
boun
d le
ft-in
turn
s al
low
ed
(202
0 op
eni
ng
day)
.
112th
Ave
nue
(N
orth
glen
n)
11
2th A
ven
ue/Y
ork
Str
eet:
- R
eco
nstr
uct t
he e
astb
oun
d le
ft-tu
rn la
ne to
pro
vid
e m
ore
stor
age
len
gth
and
con
stru
ct a
so
uthb
ound
rig
ht-t
urn
lan
e (2
035
or
soo
ner,
wh
en
criti
cal m
ovem
ent
bec
om
es L
OS
F).
Fin
al E
nviro
nm
enta
l Im
pact
Sta
tem
ent a
nd
Sec
tion
4(f)
Eva
luat
ion
No
rth
Me
tro
Co
rrid
or
Janu
ary
2011
E
S-5
8
TAB
LE E
S-10
. PR
OPO
SED
MIT
IGA
TIO
N M
EASU
RES
— E
LEM
ENTS
OF
THE
PREF
ERR
ED A
LTER
NA
TIVE
Im
pac
t Im
pac
t T
ype
Mit
igat
ion
Mea
sure
s
The
Pre
ferr
ed S
tatio
n O
ptio
ns
Wou
ld R
equ
ire S
igna
lizat
ion
and
the
Add
itio
n of
Tur
n La
ne
s at
Som
e A
djac
ent S
tatio
n A
rea
Inte
rsec
tions
to
Add
ress
Tra
ffic
Impa
cts
(con
tinue
d)
Con
stru
ctio
n an
d O
pera
tion
s (c
ontin
ued)
124th
Ave
nue
/Eas
tlake
(T
horn
ton)
Rel
ocat
ed n
orth
leg
of C
lau
de C
ourt
: -
Rel
ocat
e a
ppro
xim
atel
y 1,
000
fee
t of C
lau
de C
ourt
as
part
of
the
stat
ion
desi
gn.
Con
stru
ct a
tw
o-la
ne r
oad
that
ties
into
the
exi
stin
g C
lau
de C
ourt
on
the
nor
th s
ide
of th
e
stat
ion
are
a (2
020
ope
nin
g d
ay)
.
12
4th A
ven
ue/C
lau
de C
ourt
(re
loca
ted
nor
th le
g):
- C
onst
ruct
an
uns
igna
lized
thre
e-le
g in
ters
ectio
n w
ith s
top
cont
rol f
or th
e so
uthb
ound
ap
proa
ch, e
astb
ound
and
so
uth
bou
nd le
ft-tu
rn la
nes
an
d a
we
stbo
und
righ
t-tu
rn la
ne
(202
0 op
enin
g da
y).
12
4th A
ven
ue/C
lau
de C
ourt
(ex
istin
g so
uth
leg)
: -
Pro
vid
e an
uns
ign
aliz
ed in
ters
ectio
n w
ith s
top
cont
rol f
or th
e no
rthb
ound
app
roac
h (2
020
ope
nin
g da
y).
It is
ass
umed
that
the
inte
rse
ctio
n w
oul
d be
sig
nal
ized
by
oth
ers
by
203
5,
as p
art o
f the
City
of T
horn
ton
prop
ose
d re
cons
truc
tion
of 1
24th
Ave
nue
.
144th
Ave
nue
(T
horn
ton)
14
4th A
ven
ue/S
tatio
n A
cces
s R
oad:
-
Con
stru
ct a
ne
w u
nsig
naliz
ed
inte
rsec
tion,
with
nor
thb
ound
sto
p co
ntro
l an
d a
wes
tbo
und
left-
turn
lan
e (2
020
ope
nin
g d
ay)
. -
Sig
nal
ize
the
inte
rsec
tion
(203
5 or
soo
ner
, w
hen
criti
cal m
ove
men
t bec
omes
LO
S F
).
SH
7/1
62n
d A
venu
e (T
horn
ton)
160th
Ave
nue
(S
H 7
)/C
olor
ado
Bou
leva
rd (
exi
stin
g n
orth
leg)
- R
eco
nstr
uct t
he e
astb
oun
d le
ft-tu
rn la
ne to
pro
vid
e m
ore
stor
age
len
gth
and
con
stru
ct a
so
uthb
ound
rig
ht-t
urn
lan
e (2
020
op
enin
g d
ay)
.
16
0th A
ven
ue (
SH
7)/
Eas
t Sta
tion
Acc
ess
Ro
ad
- C
onst
ruct
a n
ew
sig
nal
ized
inte
rsec
tion
with
an
east
bou
nd le
ft-tu
rn la
ne a
nd
a w
estb
oun
d rig
ht-t
urn
lane
. C
onst
ruct
a t
wo-
lane
sou
thbo
und
app
roac
h, w
ith th
e fo
llow
ing
conf
igur
atio
n: le
ft-tu
rn la
ne a
nd
shar
ed
left-
/rig
ht-t
urn
lane
. C
onst
ruct
an
eas
tbou
nd
rece
ivin
g la
ne
for
the
dou
ble
sout
hbou
nd le
ft-tu
rn m
ovem
ent
(20
20 o
peni
ng
da
y).
- R
eco
nstr
uct t
he s
outh
bou
nd le
ft-tu
rn la
ne to
pro
vide
mor
e st
orag
e le
ngt
h (2
035
or
soon
er,
wh
en
que
ue le
ngth
s ex
cee
d th
e av
aila
ble
sto
rage
). R
econ
stru
ct th
e ea
stbo
und
left-
turn
lan
e to
pro
vid
e m
ore
stor
age
len
gth
(203
5 or
soo
ner,
to b
e do
ne in
con
junc
tion
with
the
SH
7 w
ide
ning
pro
ject
).
16
0th A
ven
ue (
SH
7)/
Col
orad
o B
oule
vard
(re
loca
ted
sout
h le
g)
- R
estr
ipe
the
No
Act
ion
two-
lane
nor
thbo
und
appr
oach
to th
e fo
llow
ing
con
figur
atio
n:
left-
turn
lan
e a
nd s
hare
d le
ft-/r
ight
-tur
n la
ne.
Con
stru
ct a
wes
tbou
nd r
ecei
ving
lane
for
the
dou
ble
nort
hbo
und
left-
turn
mov
eme
nt (
2020
ope
nin
g d
ay)
.
F
inal
Env
iron
men
tal I
mpa
ct S
tate
men
t an
d S
ectio
n 4(
f) E
valu
atio
n
No
rth
Me
tro
Co
rrid
or
E
S-5
9 Ja
nuar
y 20
11
TAB
LE E
S-10
. PR
OPO
SED
MIT
IGA
TIO
N M
EASU
RES
— E
LEM
ENTS
OF
THE
PREF
ERR
ED A
LTER
NA
TIVE
Im
pac
t Im
pac
t T
ype
Mit
igat
ion
Mea
sure
s
The
Pre
ferr
ed S
tatio
n O
ptio
ns
Wou
ld R
equ
ire S
igna
lizat
ion
and
the
Add
itio
n of
Tur
n La
ne
s at
Som
e A
djac
ent S
tatio
n A
rea
Inte
rsec
tions
to
Add
ress
Tra
ffic
Impa
cts
(con
tinue
d)
Con
stru
ctio
n an
d O
pera
tion
s (c
ontin
ued)
SH
7/1
62n
d A
venu
e (T
horn
ton)
(co
ntin
ued
)
160th
Ave
nue
(S
H 7
)/C
olor
ado
Bou
leva
rd (
relo
cate
d)
- O
n th
e ea
st s
ide
of th
e in
ters
ect
ion,
con
stru
ct a
sec
ond
thro
ugh-
traf
fic la
ne in
the
east
boun
d an
d w
estb
ound
for
abou
t 500
feet
(20
35 o
r so
oner
, to
be d
one
in c
onju
nctio
n w
ith th
e S
H 7
wid
eni
ng p
roje
ct).
At-
gra
de
Cro
ssi
ng
Ro
adw
ay a
nd
Inte
rsec
tio
n
Ro
adw
ay C
ross
ing
s M
itig
atio
n
The
Pre
ferr
ed A
lignm
ent W
ould
R
equi
re th
e M
odifi
catio
n of
E
xist
ing
Tur
n La
nes
and
A
dditi
on o
f Ne
w T
urn
Lan
es
asso
ciat
ed w
ith A
t-gr
ade
Cro
ssin
gs to
Add
ress
Tra
ffic
Impa
cts
Con
stru
ctio
n an
d O
pera
tion
s 11
2th A
ven
ue
11
2th A
ven
ue a
nd Ir
ma
Driv
e:
- R
estr
ipe
the
wes
tbou
nd, s
outh
boun
d, a
nd n
orth
boun
d le
ft-tu
rn la
nes
to p
rovi
de
mor
e st
orag
e le
ngt
h (2
020
open
ing
day)
. O
pera
te w
ith e
astb
ound
/wes
tbou
nd le
ft-tu
rn
mov
eme
nts
prot
ecte
d b
y gr
een
arr
ow
s du
ring
the
AM
pe
ak
perio
d.
Ope
rate
with
left-
turn
m
ovem
ent
s pr
otec
ted
by
gre
en a
rro
ws
in a
ll fo
ur d
irect
ions
dur
ing
the
PM
pea
k p
erio
d.
11
2th A
ven
ue a
nd Y
ork
Str
eet:
- N
o m
itig
atio
n m
easu
res
requ
ired
(se
e st
atio
n m
itiga
tion)
.
136th
Ave
nue
and
Yor
k S
tree
t
136th
Ave
nue
and
Yor
k S
tree
t: -
Con
stru
ct d
oub
le s
outh
boun
d le
ft-tu
rn la
nes
(202
0 op
enin
g da
y).
Co
nst
ruct
ion
Imp
acts
Tra
ffic,
bic
ycle
, an
d pe
dest
ria
n im
pact
s du
ring
con
stru
ctio
n
Con
stru
ctio
n
T
raffi
c m
anag
em
ent p
lans
will
be
deve
lope
d in
coo
rdin
atio
n w
ith lo
cal a
gen
cies
.
Rai
l F
reig
ht
Mo
vem
ents
BN
SF
Rai
lwa
y 23
rd S
tree
t R
aily
ard
Tra
cks
Impa
cted
P
re-
Con
stru
ctio
n
T
he B
NS
F R
ailw
ay
trac
ks w
ill b
e re
loca
ted
with
in th
e ra
ilyar
d.
Ped
estr
ian
an
d B
icyc
le F
acili
ties
At-
grad
e S
ide
wa
lk, T
rail,
and
B
ike
Lane
or
Rou
te C
ross
ings
at
Str
eets
Ope
ratio
ns
S
tree
t cro
ssin
g a
rms
will
be
prov
ided
. T
he im
plem
ent
atio
n o
f a Q
uiet
Zon
e m
ay
alte
r th
e ty
pe o
f miti
gat
ion
mea
sure
s ne
cess
ary.
P
rovi
de
addi
tiona
l saf
ety
mea
sure
s fo
r cr
ossi
ngs
that
are
de
tach
ed fr
om th
e ro
ad a
nd a
re p
art o
f a r
egio
nal
trai
l or
wh
ere
stud
ent
s ar
e lik
ely
to c
ross
(88
th A
ven
ue, 1
12th
Ave
nue
, 124
th A
ven
ue, 1
28th
Ave
nue
, Yor
k S
tree
t, an
d 13
6th A
ven
ue).
The
se m
easu
res
ma
y in
clud
e fe
ncin
g of
sid
ew
alk
s at
cro
ssin
gs, s
win
g ga
tes,
and
act
ive
ped
estr
ian-
scal
e w
arn
ing
sign
s.
Tra
il C
ross
ings
C
onst
ruct
ion
and
Ope
ratio
ns
S
ee S
ectio
n 3.
6, P
arkl
ands
and
Rec
reat
ion
Are
as, f
or m
itig
atio
n sp
ecifi
c to
rec
reat
ion
al tr
ail c
ross
ings
.
Fin
al E
nviro
nm
enta
l Im
pact
Sta
tem
ent a
nd
Sec
tion
4(f)
Eva
luat
ion
No
rth
Me
tro
Co
rrid
or
Janu
ary
2011
E
S-6
0
TAB
LE E
S-10
. PR
OPO
SED
MIT
IGA
TIO
N M
EASU
RES
— E
LEM
ENTS
OF
THE
PREF
ERR
ED A
LTER
NA
TIVE
Im
pac
t Im
pac
t T
ype
Mit
igat
ion
Mea
sure
s
Tem
pora
ry S
ide
wal
k an
d B
ike
La
ne
or R
out
e C
losu
res
Con
stru
ctio
n
S
ide
wa
lk c
losu
res
for
cons
tru
ctio
n w
ill b
e ke
pt to
a m
inim
um
and
tem
pora
ry d
etou
rs w
ill b
e pr
ovid
ed.
S
peci
fic d
etai
ls
abo
ut c
losu
res
incl
udi
ng d
urat
ion
and
deto
ur r
oute
s w
ill b
e d
eter
min
ed d
urin
g fin
al d
esig
n.
T
he c
ontr
acto
r w
ill b
e re
qui
red
to p
ublic
ly a
nn
ounc
e an
y cl
osur
es a
nd
will
be
exp
ecte
d to
pro
vide
cle
arly
mar
ked
deto
urs.
Reg
ion
al a
nd
Lo
cal
Tra
nsp
ort
atio
n P
lan
s
NW
SS
sta
tion
layo
ut c
onfli
cts
with
tw
o op
tion
s fo
r an
I-70
Eas
t D
EIS
alte
rnat
ive
Pre
-co
nstr
uctio
n
C
ontin
ue c
oord
inat
ion
with
CD
OT
as
an I-
70 E
ast E
IS p
refe
rred
alte
rnat
ive
is id
ent
ified
an
d m
odify
NW
SS
sta
tion
layo
ut
if ne
eded
.
Sou
rce:
Nor
th M
etro
Co
rrid
or P
roje
ct T
eam
, 201
0.
Not
es:
Con
stru
ctio
n im
pact
s ar
e te
mpo
rary
. O
pera
tions
impa
cts
are
mor
e p
erm
anen
t an
d re
sult
from
the
com
plet
ed, o
pera
ting
proj
ect.
1 A
lthou
gh th
is r
eso
urce
was
rec
orde
d w
ith th
e na
me
“UP
Rai
lroad
Den
t B
ranc
h,”
the
rail
line
is c
omm
only
ref
err
ed to
as
the
UP
Bo
ulde
r B
ranc
h.
AP
E
=
Are
a of
Pot
entia
l Eff
ects
B
MP
=
be
st m
anag
eme
nt p
ract
ice
CC
D
=
City
and
Cou
nty
of D
enve
r C
DN
R
=
Col
orad
o D
epar
tmen
t of N
atu
ral R
esou
rces
C
DO
T
=
Col
orad
o D
epar
tmen
t of T
rans
port
atio
n C
DO
W
=
Col
orad
o D
ivis
ion
of W
ildlif
e C
DP
HE
=
C
olor
ado
Dep
artm
ent o
f Pub
lic H
ealth
and
E
nviro
nmen
t C
WA
=
C
lean
Wat
er A
ct
DE
IS
=
Dra
ft E
nviro
nme
ntal
Impa
ct S
tate
men
t E
MU
=
el
ectr
ic m
ultip
le u
nit
ES
A
=
Env
ironm
enta
l Site
Ass
essm
ent
FE
IS
=
Fin
al E
nviro
nmen
tal I
mpa
ct S
tate
men
t
HM
WM
D
=
Haz
ardo
us M
ate
rial
s an
d W
aste
Man
agem
ent
Div
isio
n
I-
=
Inte
rsta
te #
LE
D
=
light
-em
ittin
g di
ode
LO
S
=
Leve
l of S
ervi
ce
MB
TA
=
M
igra
tory
Bird
Tre
aty
Act
M
OA
=
M
emor
andu
m o
f A
gree
men
t N
WS
S
=
Nat
iona
l Wes
tern
Sto
ck S
how
O
SH
A
=
Occ
upat
iona
l Saf
ety
and
Hea
lth A
dmin
istr
atio
n P
M10
=
pa
rtic
ulat
e m
atte
r le
ss th
an 1
0 m
icro
ns in
di
amet
er
RO
W
=
right
-of-
wa
y R
TD
=
R
egio
nal T
rans
por
tatio
n D
istr
ict
SH
=
Sta
te H
igh
wa
y
SH
PO
=
Sta
te H
isto
ric P
rese
rvat
ion
Off
icer
S
unco
r =
Sun
cor
Ene
rgy
(U.S
.A.)
Inc.
T
&E
=
thr
eate
ned
and
end
ange
red
U
DF
CD
=
Urb
an D
rain
age
and
Flo
od C
ont
rol D
istr
ict
Uni
form
Act
=
Uni
form
Rel
ocat
ion
Ass
ista
nce
and
Rea
l Pro
pert
y A
cqui
sitio
n P
olic
ies
Act
of 1
970,
as
amen
ded
U
P
= U
nion
Pac
ific
US
=
Uni
ted
Sta
tes
US
#
= U
nite
d S
tate
s H
igh
wa
y N
umbe
r U
SA
CE
=
Uni
ted
Sta
tes
Arm
y C
orp
s of
Eng
inee
rs
US
EP
A
= U
nite
d S
tate
s E
nvi
ronm
enta
l Pro
tect
ion
Age
ncy
US
FW
S
= U
nite
d S
tate
s F
ish
and
Wild
life
Ser
vice
V
MT
=
veh
icle
mile
s tr
avel
ed