Archive for year: 2011

Dear Sirs:

PLAN Jeffco submits these comments in response to the Fish and Wildlife Services’ request for public comments as part of its NEPA scoping process relating to the Services’ development of an EA. The EA is being developed to analyze the impacts of the Service’s proposed transfer/sale of a 300-foot wide strip of land along the eastern boundary of the Rocky Flats National Wildlife Refuge for use as a transportation corridor.

PLAN Jeffco is the citizens group that, in 1972, initiated the first county open space acquisition program in the country. We continue to monitor, advise and work with the staff, Open Space Advisory Committee and elected officials regarding the Jefferson County Open Space Program. In 1989, Plan Jeffco joined with other groups to urge the Open Space Program to preserve and acquire the important natural habitat in the Rocky Flats ecosystem including the acquisition of Section 16. That effort has resulted in much open space preservation by Jeffco which protects the habitat as well as the scenic vistas in the area near the Refuge.

We are very concerned about the planned scope of the NEPA analysis which would only look at the impacts of the transfer on the lands within the National Wildlife Refuge System and would ignore the impacts on the impacted communities outside of the Refuge System. To comply with NEPA, FWS cannot wear blinders nor can it avoid addressing the indirect impacts to the people, wildlife, scenic vistas, already congested Hwy 93, water, air quality, and noise resulting from the transfer of the land for use as a transportation corridor. The Jefferson Parkway Public Highway Authority, the JPPHA, has requested the corridor be transferred to it so it can use the land to construct a toll way; whereas the City of Golden has requested the land be transferred to it so it can construct a bike way for use by bikers, pedestrians or equestrians. The impacts of these two proposals on the affected environment outside of the Rocky Flats Refuge are obviously very different in intensity and in scope. These off-refuge impacts must be analyzed in the EA for the Service to comply with NEPA.

The type of detrimental impacts we are particularly concerned about are the future foreseeable effects from the construction and use of the toll way and from the induced accelerated development. These clearly fall within the definition of “indirect impacts” as set forth in CEQ’s NEPA regulations at 40 CFR Part 1508.8. Indirect effects include those “which are caused by the action and are later in time or farther removed in distance, but are still reasonably foreseeable. Indirect effects may include growth inducing effects and other effects related to induced changes in the pattern of land use, population density or growth rate, and related effects on air and water and other natural systems, including ecosystems.”

Additionally, some of these off-refuge impacts also are significant and will require an EIS and not merely an EA. As shown by the following, these impacts fall within the terms included in CEQ’s regulatory definition of “significance” at 40 CFR Part 1508.27.

TRAFFIC IMPACTS

If the Service were to transfer the lands in the transportation corridor to the JPPHA, the foreseeable impacts to those of us who use the roads in the northern part of Jefferson County will be extremely negative and significant. Based on data in the JPPA System Level Study for the Jefferson Parkway (July 20, 2009) submitted to CDOT and DRCOG in July 2009, Golden prepared the map shown in Attachment 1. This map dramatically shows that by 2015, toll way traffic will cause a 38% increase in traffic on Hwy 93, which at certain times is at or above capacity causing stop and go conditions for miles. It also shows a 117% projected traffic increase on 64th Avenue and significant increases in traffic on C-40, parts of 6th Avenue, I-70 and C-470 and on other roads in the area. Attachment 1 shows that there are some anticipated decreases in the amount of traffic projected but they are more than offset by the size of the increases and negative effects on traffic on other roads. Also refer to Attachment 2, for a depiction of the 2035 traffic impacts which continue to predict significant increases in other roads due to the toll way.

These traffic volumes do not include the additional traffic that is projected to be generated by the development of the Candelas Property located south of the Refuge. The toll way is specifically designed benefit this planned development by transecting it so it could funnel traffic to and from this 1451 acre new urban center. The designs for the Property include high density office, commercial and residential development which will be accelerated by construction of the toll way. According to the System Study, by 2015 18,000-24,000 trips a day will be generated by Candelas development, greatly increasing the traffic load and commuter time on the roads shown on Attachments 1 and 2. Candelas generated traffic is projected to worsen by 2035 when 23,000-39,000 trips a day will enter and leave the development. These projected traffic increases will only worsen the traffic conditions on the roads in the northern part of Jefferson County.

These increased traffic volumes will not only lengthen the time spent by commuters sitting in traffic and on traffic flow, it will have air quality and noise impacts on those who live near and use the impacted roads. Based on the above described projections by JPPHA, the intensity and the severity of the impacts are significant. Similarly, the NEPA analysis should look at the indirect traffic impacts that would result from Golden’s bike way proposal.

POTENTIAL PLUTONIUM CONTAMINATION

PLAN Jeffco recognizes that before the Service accepted transfer of the lands comprising the Rocky Flats Refuge, EPA had certified that the clean-up was complete and that the lands were safe for refuge use. As you know, there are people and entities that dispute these findings. They contend this certification is not valid and that the construction and use of the transportation corridor for a toll way will create a significant human health risk.

There are several scientific studies that support these serious public health concerns. The latest information was sampled in April 2010 and analyzed by Marco Kaltofen, Boston Chemical Data Corp., Natick, MA. It showed plutonium contamination from dust blown from the Refuge onto land across from the Refuge on Indiana St. Additionally, the soil sampling conducted by the Citizens’ Environmental Sampling Committee conducted in 1993 and 1994 also found plutonium contamination that had originated on Rocky Flats in areas as far as 5-6 miles from the Rocky Flats plant. Finally, there is the 1975 study by the Jefferson County Health Department’s Director, CJ Johnson, that also showed potential health hazards due to plutonium in the dust that may be inhaled by humans.

Even after the EPA certification there continues to be a serious controversy over the health risks from digging up the transportation corridor for construction and use as a toll way; this constitutes a “significant” indirect impact of any alternative in which the Service transfers the transportation corridor to the JPPHA which intends to use the corridor to build a toll way. Based on this significant scientific controversy over human health effects, FWS should conclude that the land transfer to JPPHA is likely to have a significant impact on the human environment. Therefore, NEPA requires that this issue be analyzed in an EIS.

Furthermore, we have found no evidence that, prior to certification, EPA analyzed and evaluated the sufficiency of the Rocky Flats clean-up in relation to the future use of the transportation corridor for construction and use as highway. To the contrary, the EPA clean-up standard was based on the risks to a refuge worker working 4 hours indoors and 4 hours outside on the refuge for 18 years, not on a person grading the land during highway construction. Nor was the land cleaned up to a standard that would not risk the health of those living and using roads in the area, of refuge staff or visitors or of all of us in the Denver metro area that may breathe in the construction dust during and after the toll way is built.

The lack of EPA certification for construction and use of the corridor for highway, means that there may continue to be significant health risks resulting from using the transportation corridor for other than for refuge purposes. Because there is no empirical data for the Service to rely on to determine that the indirect impacts from disturbance of the surface and subsurface due to highway construction will not cause health risks, the Service must obtain such information prior to any FONSI or completion of an EIS and ROD. Although the indirect human health impacts from the construction and use of the corridor for a bike way should be much less than those from road construction, similar impact information should be obtained regarding potential bike way construction and use.

ECOSYSTEM DEGRADATION

As mentioned above, PLAN Jeffco was the catalyst for the Jefferson County Open Space Program. This program, along with the City of Boulder, Boulder County, the City of Westminster, and the City of Arvada have preserved wildlife corridors extending from the Foothills to the plains East of the proposed toll way. Migration along these corridors is significant and the toll way will provide a significant barrier to this migration.

In addition the dissecting of these corridors, the toll way and the development it will accelerated will diminish the other purposes for which these lands were preserved, i.e. open vistas, protecting the mountain backdrop, and providing natural areas for public enjoyment.

The Service must analyze the direct and indirect impacts of all the alternatives on the open space values, including scenery, wildlife, and recreation.

AIR QUALITY

The Service is required to take a hard look at the impacts associated with all alternatives under consideration. Relative to air quality, the Service must assess the effect the toll way and bike way would have on ozone levels in the region, and assess whether the toll way would contribute to the region falling out of compliance with the new and stricter ozone standards expected to be adopted by the Environmental Protection Agency in the next few months.

In 2008, the Environmental Protection Agency revised the ozone National Ambient Air Quality Standards (“NAAQS”) to 0.075 parts per million (“ppm”). See 40 C.F.R. § 50.15. However, the EPA has proposed to strengthen the ozone NAAQS by setting a limit of no more than 0.060-0.070 parts per million over an 8-hour period. See 75 Fed. Reg. 2938-3052 (Jan. 19, 2010). The EPA expects to finalize the new ozone NAAQS between 0.060 and 0.070 parts per million in July of 2011. See U.S. EPA, Declaration of Regina McCarthy (Dec. 8, 2010), available at http://www.epa.gov/glo/pdfs/20101208declaration.pdf (last visited July 28, 2011).

Even though the Denver Regional Council of Governments (DRCOG) looked at ozone levels when they adopted the regional transportation plan (RTP), DRCOG did not assess the effects on ozone levels of the RTP relative to newer and stricter ozone standards adopted by the EPA in 2008 and likely to be adopted in 2011. Hence, the Service cannot rely on the DRCOG analysis and must conduct its own, and disclose the results, including the likelihood of non-attainment with the ozone standards, in the environmental analysis. Moreover, because the potential consequences of failing to meet the new ozone standard under the Clean Air Act are severe and significant, and because the public health impacts of increased ozone are so serious, the Service must undertake an EIS instead of an EA to comply with the NEPA regulations.

Lastly, the Service is required to analyze the impacts of the alternatives on other air pollutants for which the EPA has established NAAQS, including, but not limited to, the 1-hour nitrogen dioxide NAAQS (see 75 Fed. Reg. 6474-6537 (Feb. 9, 2010)), the particulate matter less than 10 microns in diameter NAAQS (see 40 C.F.R. §§ 50.10 and 52.21(c)), and particulate matter less than 2.5 microns in diameter NAAQS (see 40 C.F.R. § 50.13 and 75 Fed. Reg. 64864-64907 (Oct. 20, 2010)).

DRCOG is not required to analyze impacts to such NAAQS because the region is not designated nonattainment. However, simply because the area is not designated nonattainment at the present does not mean that future development related to the proposed actions will not jeopardize compliance with other NAAQS. Thus, the Fish and Wildlife Service should analyze all reasonably foreseeable air quality impacts, including impacts to the ozone, particulate matter, and nitrogen dioxide NAAQS resulting from the proposed transfer/sale of the corridor.

Thank you for this opportunity to comment. We urge the Service to undertake an EIS. If the Service declines at this point in the process to switch to an EIS, we ask that the Service ensure that there is an adequate period for public comment on the draft EA.

Sincerely yours,

Margot Zallen, Chair, PLANJeffco

by Ann Bonnell

Chatfield Lake was originally built for flood control and recreation. A study to store an additional 12 vertical feet, or 20,600 acre feet of water for residential, commercial and agricultural use, has been ongoing for over 10 years. There are 14 possible water users/districtswho may use this water. The additional water has only junior water rights, which means that the water may be available for storage in 1 out of every 3 years.

To accommodate the every-third-year higher water levels, the picnic areas, beach facilities, roads, marinas and other recreational facilities may have to be relocated. The lost wetlands, wildlife habitat and Preble’s meadow jumping mouse habitat will have to be replaced and over 200 acres of mature cottonwood forest are slated to be removed. In most areas, the added water will be shallow and not navigable by motor boats. In most years, the water levels will be where they are now, but the new facilities will be farther from the water. Surrounding the lake will be a “bath tub ring” of dirt, sand and mud flats. The water storage partners have promised to do their best to make amends for the proposed big changes around the lake.

If you are interested, what can you do?

The Draft FR/EIS [Feasibility Study/Environmental Impact Statement] on the Chatfield Reallocation Study is expected at the end of September 2011. The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers will be holding three public meetings to provide information on the project, probably in mid October. There will also be a public comment period. The document itself, with all its appendices,will be over 2600 pages. It will be available for study in hard copy at several locations in the Denver area; it will also be available on the Internet. You can find some advance information on the water user’s public relations website at www.chatfieldstudy.org.

To see the maps on the site go to Supporting Documents, Public Outreach Flyer. You can ask questions in advance or be put on a list for notificationsby calling 1-866-643- 5875. 

Don’t miss this year’s PLAN Jeffco Dinner with the Commissioners It’s a double header!

Two luminous guests, for the price of one!

Thursday, October 13th, 2011. 5:30pm with John Fielder! Lise Aangeenbrug!

Join us and John Fielder, world renowned landscape photographer, and Lise Aangeenbrug, Executive Director of Great Outdoors Colorado, for our annual dinner celebrating our part in preserving our open spaces. We will enjoy seeing some of Mr. Fielder’s latest photographs from locations in Jefferson County — as well as an advance peek at Mr. Fielder’s current project, “Mountains to Plains: Documenting 20 Years of Preservation,” offering visual testimony to the accomplishments by Great Outdoors Colorado and its many partners to protect Colorado’s natural heritage. Ms. Aangeenbrug will introduce Mr. Fielder, and explain GoCo’s role in our shared mission to ensure our land and open spaces can be enjoyed by future generations.

Rub elbows with the Commissioners and other county officials.

Tom Hoby, the director of the Jefferson County Open Space Program, and the chair of the Open Space Advisory Committee will also be making brief remarks. This is your opportunity to informally connect with county officials!

Copies of John Fielder’s previous works, both books and calendars, will be available for purchase — part of the proceeds to benefit PLAN Jeffco.

Make Your Reservations Now!

PLAN Jeffco’s Annual Dinner with the County Commissioners

Thursday, October 13th. 5:30pm

Mount Vernon Country Club

24933 Club House Circle, Golden CO

For tickets, please send $40 per attendee to:

PLAN Jeffco Dinner

% Michelle Poolet

24395 Cody Park Road

Golden 80401

Or to pay online, go to our web page planjeffco.org/dinner to use PayPal or your creditcard. 

The Jeffco Open Space Foundation was incorporated in June 1998 and received 501(c)3 status in April 1999. It was incorporated “for education and charitable purposes to receive, solicit, administer and disburse gifts, grants devices, bequests or other conveyances or real and personal property or the income derived therefrom for the benefit of the Jefferson County Open Space Department upon a request from the director of the Jefferson County Open Space Department.”

The impetus for its formation was the dedication of the Nature Center Building and the fact that if one donated appreciated property to the County, the Internal Revenue Service would only allow deduction of the acquisition cost of the property. However, if the property was donated to a charity, the present market value was deductible.

The Foundation’s Director all are present or former members of OSAC plus past Open Space Director Ray Printz. Open Space Director Tom Hoby and Assistant County Attorney Steve Snyder serve as ex-officio members.

In the 13 years since the Foundation’s inception cash donations have totaled $764,000 – about $60,000 per year. These donations have been for memorials, bequests, and direct contributions. In these 13 years lands with a market value of $1,219,000, mineral rights with a value of $170,000, and a conservation easement with a value of $944,000 have been received.

Arvada Parks’ contributions. As such we have received donations for the West Arvada Dog (off-leash) Park, The West Arvada Disc Golf Course, The Skate Park (under construction) adjacent to the Apex Recreation Center, plus some contributions directed toward trails and conservation. Disbursements for these so far have included $63,950 for the dog park, $10,600 for the disc golf, and more than $20,000 is available for the skate park.

Accomplishments funded partially or fully by the Foundation for Open Space include:

Shelters in Elk Meadow Park

Exhibits at the Lookout Mountain Nature Center

Supplies to build trail bridges

Trail signs

Audio Visual systems for the Open Space meeting rooms

Improvements to the Plymouth Trail at Deer Creek Park

Fencing at Elk Meadow Dog Park

Picnic shelter at Lair ‘o’ the Bear Park

Memorials

Legal fees, back taxes, etc. for land and easement donations

Beginning in 2009, the Foundation began paying the Field Trip costs for Jefferson County Elementary and Middle Schools with 40% or more attendees on free or reduced lunch fees. To date more than $13,000 has been spent for trips to Lookout Mountain Nature Center, Hiwan Homestead Museum, Majestic View Nature Center (Arvada), Bear Creek Lake Park (Lakewood), and Dinosaur Ridge. The feedback from teachers, students, and staff at the parks for this program has been enthusiastic.

In 2009, the Foundation Board began looking for an activity that would raise the profile of both the Open Space Program and the Foundation. And, if it made money, that also was fine. Many events were considered, finally settling on a photo contest. The photo contest was held between October 2010 and March 2011. Entries were received from 190 individuals (30 youth). Entries came from all counties of the metro area plus St Louis, MO and Westfield, NJ.

The categories for the photos were: Wonderful Wildlife, Spectacular Scenery, and People in the Parks. As one would expect, Spectacular Scenery had the most entries, both adult and youth. Open Space’s most highly used park, Crown Hill, was the subject of the most entries. Twenty-three County parks were subjects of the photos along with six city parks partially acquired or developed using Open Space funds.

The Foundation plans to repeat the contest this year.

Here are some of the winning photos (click to enlarge).

All of the winning photos are on the Foundation web site:

www.jeffcoopenspace.org

When long-time OSAC Chairperson Greg Stevinson stepped down from this post as OSAC Chair in 2009, prior to the end of his term, Jan Wilkins and Wayne Forman – also seasoned veterans of OSAC, stepped up to co-chair the Committee. Finding that they worked together so well, they requested that this ruling structure remain in place, but alas…bylaws are bylaws, and OSAC doesn’t allow for co-chairing. So Wayne stepped into the Chairperson position, and Jan is now a Co-Vice Chair with Ken Morfit.

Talking with these two outside of an OSAC meeting is a genuinely pleasurable experience. Jan is warm and outgoing; she speaks freely of her involvement with open space issues over the years. Wayne is practical and forthcoming, and – as a practitioner of water, land use, and environmental law, extremely committed to Open Space.

Jan’s involvement as an activist for open space causes started around 1982, when – as a resident of Mount Vernon Country Club, on the west end of Lookout Mountain, she became chair of the Canyon Defense Coalition, an organization that opposed the plan to develop a rock quarry in Clear Creek Canyon. Her early exposure to Jefferson County’s approach to open space was her participation in the “Rock Round Table”, the County-initiated attempt at arbitration over this matter. Ultimately, and partially as a result of this experience, Jan developed her open space philosophy: “…just because land is undeveloped doesn’t mean that it’s preserved…”, and “…you need to buy it to preserve it!”

Jan also became a founding member of the Clear Creek Conservancy, citing Clear Creek as “a jewel on Denver’s doorstep, and a gift to this part of the world”. During this time she also stepped up to serve as President of the Mount Vernon Country Club. Never one to sit still for long, Jan teamed with Margot Zallen, Chair of PLAN Jeffco, Sharon Freeman and others to help with Save Open Space, a campaign organized by PLAN Jeffco and supported by OSAC, which at the time was being chaired by Greg Stevinson. The $160M revenue bond issue – to raise money to acquire open space land throughout Jefferson County – passed with a whopping 72 percent of the vote of county residents. As Jan said, “It’s one thing to oppose development; it’s another to form a method to save open space lands…the SOS campaign reflected the commitment of the voters.”

In 1998, Jan swapped her role as an Open Space activist for that of a politically-oriented Open Space advocate when she was appointed to OSAC.

To paraphrase Jan – the voters have seen so many key acquisitions since the passage of the SOS bond – they’ve been able to see what’s happened with the bond funds they approved with SOS. They’ve seen years of maintaining integrity in land acquisitions, of avoiding politicization of the process, of unwavering delivery of the process based on the founding principles of OSAC. In a moment of lightness, Jan confirmed that OSAC has had so much fun achieving the OS goals with the bond money…”OSAC, the most fun that you can have on a committee in this county!”

Jan spoke of Centennial Cone OS Park…dear to her heart, since it was very near the site of the proposed rock quarry back in the 80s, and is now almost totally protected open space. “Imagine, it went from a proposal for the largest gravel quarry in the state, to include 400 trucks a day, 7 days a week, traveling on Highway 6, to the crown jewel of Open Space. Centennial Cone is the best of citizen activism – it’s fulfilled such terrific ideals, 40 years of people’s visions…”

Wayne Forman’s attraction to Open Space began with his mountain biking excursions through the Open Space Park trails system. A 1984 graduate of CU Law in Boulder, and subsequently a resident of Denver’s Park Hill area, he saw Jefferson County Open Space as a way to “get away from it all”. In 1993 he moved to Genesee, in part to be closer to the lands that he’d grown to love. He’d been a JeffCo resident for about 6 months when he saw a notice in a local paper for an opening on OSAC. He applied, and was appointed as a reserve committee member. Wayne deprecatingly speaks of himself as the “token Democrat” of OSAC.

Wayne has a reputation among his colleagues as a quiet but very wise man. As per Jan, “…when Wayne has a point to make, it’s based on reason and logic.”

When asked about the “co-chair method” of governing OSAC, both Jan and Wayne agreed that it was great to have coverage for meetings and other events…one or another would always be available. At the end of the term, when it was evident that the “cochair method” would have to come to an end, Wayne and Jan discussed the issue and decided that Wayne would put his hat in the ring for the chair position, which he won. The question, of course, is “how different is the governing structure when it’s hierarchical (i.e. a single chairman) versus when there are two people sharing the leadership responsibility. Both agreed that the difference is minimal. Since Wayne took over as OSAC chair, the committee mindset has changed; the committee is now “a group of equals that is ‘horizontally balanced” with a lot of cross-person engagement and interaction”, to quote the two former co-chairs.

Wayne spoke to the invaluable nature of citizen participation in Open Space matters. He strongly believes that OSAC has to answer to the voting public, and that its mission is to benefit the Greater Good. “There’s a lot of balancing involved when you’re on OSAC; you have to hear all sides, you have to strike a proper balance.” According to Wayne, JCOS staff takes a lot of input early in the decisionmaking process, especially with individual and community meetings; they then share with and work very tightly with OSAC to develop a going-forward plan. “There’s two-way respect in the relationship, and OSAC trusts in the JCOS staff’s work, expertise, and recommendations.” Jan agreed, adding that “JCOS [staff] makes it easy for OSAC to make good decisions.”

The conversation then moved to the challenges facing OSAC and JCOS. The bond monies are mostly spent, and for the foreseeable future the organization will be working with an extremely tight budget of approximately $6M per year for acquisitions, development and joint venture grants. Open Space supporters are aging, and finding ways to attract a new population of supporters will be on the top of OSAC’s (and JCOS’s) to-do list. With OSAC’s support, JCOS Director Tom Hoby has launched a project to survey existing and potential users of Open Space properties, in an attempt to take the pulse of the changing demographics and understand how trail use concepts are shifting. Jan remarked on the recent Open Space Foundation photo contest, in the category of ‘Kids Under 18’ alone there were over 100 entries, many of which were of remarkable quality. She feels that this bodes well for support from the youngest generation.

Speaking to the future: “We are entering a new part in the life of the Open Space Program, where the focus is shifting from just acquisitions to more of an acquisition-development-management balance…we’ve got as much land as we could acquire, and now big blocks of land outstrip our financial capacity to acquire them…but we will manage.”

Speaking to the topic of the value that Open Space adds to Jefferson County, “…after more than 30 years involvement with Open Space, it’s apparent that the recognition of Open Space to the health of the county has never been stronger…there’s strong support from the Board of County Commissioners, the cities, and the park ‘n’ rec districts…natural resources (i.e. Open Space) are proeconomy, pro-lifestyle, and pro-quality of life…Open Space adds value to living in Jefferson county.”

In summary, Wayne pointed out that “people get involved initially [with Open Space] as an advocate for a point of view, to have the opportunity to make a difference. PLAN Jeffco and other agencies – MALT, CCLC, CARE, and many others – give people a chance to advocate.” From Jan’s point of view: “…with the very broad base of support [that Open Space has], I feel very optimistic about the foundation we all have laid for the Open Space program.”