Denver Federal Center master site plan : final environmental impact statement

324 Pages·1997·87.9 MB·English

by  Balloffet and Associates, Inc

BLM LIBRARY
8805690
FINAL
Environmental Impact Statement
Denver Federal Center Master Site Plan
CO
Lakewood,
U.5. General Services Administration
Rocky Mountain Region
September 1997

Ib'Ub^O!
DENVER FEDERAL CENTER
DENVER FEDERAL CENTER
MASTER PLAN
SITE
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT
Preparedfor:
General Services Administration
Rocky Mountain Region
Preparedby:
Balloffet and Associates, Inc.
2000 Vermont Drive/Fort Collins, CO 80525
Phone: [phone]
In association with:
Louis Berger and Associates, Inc.
September 1997

Final Environmental Impact Statement
GSA Contract No. GS-08-94-JWD-0060
Order No. P-08-95-0516
General Services Administration
Denver Federal Center Master Site Plan
Lakewood, Colorado
Lisa Morpurgo, AICP
Portfolio Management
General Services Administration
Denver Federal Center
P.O. Box 25546
Denver, CO 80225-0546
303/236-7131 (x250)
September 1997
Abstract:
The purpose of the Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) is to identify and evaluate the potential
impacts to the natural and human environment associated with the adoption and implementation ofthe
proposed Denver Federal Center master site plan and the No Action alternative (the continuation of
current development objectives and policies). This EIS describes and evaluates potential impacts
related to the following resources: topography; soils; hydrology and water quality; air quality; noise;
vegetation; wetlands; wildlife; threatened and endangered plants and wildlife; cultural resources;
population; employment and income; housing; community services; recreation resources; land use;
infrastructure/utilities; and transportation and traffic. In addition, the EIS evaluates the following:
cumulative impacts; unavoidable adverse impacts; relationship between short-term use ofthe human
environment and the maintenance and enhancement of long-term productivity; irreversible or
irretrievable commitment of resources; and conflicts with Federal, regional, state, local, or Indian
Tribe land use plans, policies, and controls.
Comment Due Date: October 24, 1997
Number ofVolumes:
1

Integrated Studies
Executive Summary

() Draft (X) Final Environmental Impact Statement
Denver Federal Center Master Site Plan
CO
Lakewood,
RESPONSIBLE FEDERAL AGENCY: General Services Administration
RESPONSIBLE OFFICIAL:
Direct inquiries to:
Lisa Morpurgo. AICP
Portfolio Management
General Services Administration
Denver Federal Center
P.O. Box 25546
Denver, CO 80225-0546
303/236-7131 (x250)
Summary
ES.O Executive
The Denver Federal Center (DFC) is a 670-acre government-owned installation located within the
City of Lakewood in Jefferson County, Colorado. The DFC contains over three million occupiable
square feet of office, storage, laboratory, and other specialized space in over 90 buildings. Oyer 25
Federal agencies and bureaus are currently housed at the DFC. The General Services Administration
(GSA) is responsible for the operation and maintenance of the DFC land, facilities, and
infrastructure in support ofthe DFC's tenant agencies. The GSA has prepared a master site plan
to serve as a guide for the future use and development ofthe DFC property.
ES.1 Purpose of and Need for the Proposed Action
In 1979, the GSA prepared the first DFC master site plan to guide site development for a period of
two decades. Since this planning time frame has nearly expired, and the demographics and services of
the DFC Federal tenants have changed, there is a need for a new master site plan. The purpose ofthe
proposed master site plan is to adequately plan for the efficient use and potential future development
ofthe DFC property. The purpose ofthis document is to evaluate the potential impacts to the natural
and human environment associated with the adoption and implementation ofthe proposed master site
plan, as well as the No-Action alternative (the continuation of current development objectives and
policies).
ES.2 Alternatives Considered Including the Proposed Action
The two alternatives evaluated in this document are: the Proposed Action alternative; and the No-
Action alternative. The Proposed Action alternative is defined as the adoption and
September 1997 DFC MasterSite Plan -Final EIS
Page Executive Summary
i
implementation ofthe proposed DFC master site plan. The proposed master site plan is designed
to have the flexibility to accommodate and adjust to a range ofpossible future scenarios relating
to intensity of use ofthe DFC property and assets. These possible scenarios are generalized into
three different level-of-use categories that have been chosen to summarize the most likely
outcome of future conditions. The scenarios represent logical points along a continuum of
possible futures, and are based on potential levels ofactivity for the DFC over the next 20 years.
The scenarios described under the proposed action alternative include: status quo; the contracted
use of the DFC; and moderate growth of the DFC. The No-Action alternative is defined as the
continuation of operations, management, and development decisions at the DFC under existing
policies and plans.
ES.3 Affected Environment
The implementation of the Proposed Action has the potential to affect various environmental
resources within the DFC property, as well as the potential to affect certain resources beyond the
boundaries ofthe DFC. The following environmental resource areas are described and assessed
in this document: Physical Environment (topography, soils, hydrology and water quality, air
quality, and noise); Biological Resources (vegetation, wetlands, wildlife, and threatened and
endangered species); Cultural Resources; Socioeconomic Factors and Infrastructure (population,
employment and income, housing, community services, recreation resources, land use, and
infrastructure/utilities); and Transportation and Traffic. Each resource description focuses on the
relevant attributes and characteristics of that resource with the potential to be affected by the
Proposed Action, or that represent potential use encumbrances to the Proposed Action.
ES.4 Consequences
The potential consequences/impacts associated with the two alternatives are identified for each ofthe
evaluated environmental resources as well as the following: Cumulative Impacts; Unavoidable
Adverse Impacts; Relationship Between Short-Term Use of the Human Environment and the
Maintenance and Enhancement of Long-Term Productivity; Irreversible or Irretrievable
Commitments of Resources; and Conflicts with Federal, Regional, State, Local, or Indian Tribe
Land Use Plans, Policies, and Controls. The implementation of the proposed master site plan
anticipates an insignificant level ofimpact to the following: Hydrology and Water Quality; and Land
Use. These insignificant impacts are derived from the known and suspected sources ofcontamination
at the DFC associated with former land uses at the site. These impacts are the subject of an
independent site-wide investigation at the DFC that will result in the implementation of site-wide
remediation activities. The anticipated impacts associated with the Proposed Action and the No-
Action alternatives for each ofthe evaluated resources are shown in the following matrix ofimpacts.
In addition, the Proposed Action is anticipated to result in an insignificant level ofcumulative impacts.
September 1997 DFC MasterSite Plan-Final EIS
Page ii Executive Summary