Q: You say this plan will go to the BOCC in October. Will POSAC ever be asked to make a recommendation on this plan?
Response: No, I don't believe so.
Q: One theme from the public comments submitted are that some perceived risks may not be known until the design process. Can you address those concerns?
Response: There is more environmental work to be done in the next phases of the project. There is still a lot of data from multiple agencies to work through. Once we have an approved document, we will try to get further funding from outside sources.
Q: Will there be an assessment of contamination along the railroad corridor? Will that be part of your environmental work?
Response: I assume there will be, but I don't know what kind of survey that will entail.
Q: What is Boulder County's connection to this project? Will it be paid for with open space tax dollars?
Response: It's not an open space project, so open space tax won't pay for it. About 15% of the transportation sales tax goes to regional trails and bikeways, so that is what we would use for our local match. Town of Erie and City of Boulder may contribute to the local match. Then we would look for grant opportunities.
Q: What does Rails with Trails mean?
Response: When rails are officially abandoned, trails can use that corridor. In this case, the rails are not officially abandoned. It's not being used and there are no plans to use it, so it makes more sense to not put the trail on the rail bed. We are leaving the rails there.
Q: If this is used as a regional trail, and if there are seasonal closures, would you close the trail?
Response: At this point, the county is not making recommendations about seasonal closures. We are still working OSMP, CPW, and BCPOS staff to see what mitigation efforts would be if we don't have seasonal closures.
Q: I also share the ecological concerns, but you seem to assume these concerns can be mitigated. Are there any possibilities to look at other routes?
Response: CPW doesn't make recommendations this early in a project, because things can change. That is one of the reasons for phasing a project, so we can be flexible. We might have a different preferred alignment later, but right now we need to have one preferred to start the design phase.
Public Comment:
Karen Hollweg, representing PLAN Boulder County. They support implementation of the BERT, with revisions to preserve environmental resources. They are concerned with the portion of the plan from 75th to the Teller-White Rocks Trail due to the biodiversity areas. They encourage consideration of an alignment running on land south of the critical resources.
Suzanne Bhatt, Boulder. She is troubled by the untenable choice between environmental protection and safety. She would like staff to take time to find a better alignment and asks POSAC to not approve the current plan.
Cathern Smith, Louisville. She believes the recommended route is the most environmentally detrimental option.
Bev Baker, Louisville, speaking on behalf of Boulder County Audubon Society. They ask staff to find a less ecologically harmful alignment. They would like to see portions of the Valmont route to be reevaluated.
Tabitha Farrer, Boulder County, She lives north of the railway section, between 75th and 95th and has a conservation easement on her property. She states the proposed BERT would undo the goals of the CE.
Iayana Rael. She commented that the area near Valmont Butte is a culturally important site.