Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout07/28/1998b.e_~ AGENDA CITY OF WHEAT RIDGE ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT AND REVITALIZATION COiI~IMISSION Tuesday, July 28, 1998 7:00 p.m.._ _ Notice is hereby given of a Public Meeting to be held before the City of Wheat Ridge Economic Development and Revitalization Commission on July 28, 1998, at 7:00 p.m., City Council Chambers, 7500 West 29th Avenue, Wheat Ridge, Colorado. ' 1. Call The Meeting to Order 2. Roll Call of Members 3. Consideration of Absences 4. Approval of Minutes - June 30,1998 5. Public Forum (This is the time for any person to speak on any subject not appearing on the agenda.) 6. Unfinished Business A) Wheat Ridge Wadsworth Boulevard Corridor Study B) Business DevelopmentBusiness Retention Plan 7. New Business 8. Adjournment C:\Barbara\ECODEVOWGENDAS\980728. WPD MINUTES OF WHEAT RIDGE ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT AND REVITALIZATION COMMISSION - JiJNE 30,1998 7:00 P.M. 1. CALL THE MEETING TO ORDER The Wheat Ridge Economic Development and Revitalization Commission meeting was called to order by Chairman ROACH at 7:00 p.m. _ _ 2. ROLL CALL OF MEMBERS EDARC Commissioners present: Norman Burkpile Sandra Collins Elwyn Kiplinger Janet Leo Mazjorie Platter Jerry Roach Also attending were: Martin Orner, Economic Development SpecialisUAssociate Planner Ann Lazzeri, Recording Secretary 3. CONSIDERATION OF ABSENCES EDARC Commissioners absent: Rae JeairBehm Joe Drew Richard Matthews 4. APPROVAL OF MINUTES It was moved by Commissioner BURKPILE, and seconded by Commissioner LEO to approve the minutes of the Mazch 31, 1998 EDARC meeting. The motion carried 6-0 with Commissioners BEHM, DREW and MATTHEWS absent. 5. PUBLIC FORUM No one appeazed to speak. EDARC Minutes Page 1 6/30/98 ~ 6. UNFINISHED BUSINESS ITEMS - A. King Soopers/Walgreens - Applewood In response to a question from Commissioner LEO, Martin Orner presented a brief update on the status of the possible relocation of the Walgreens store in Applewood. 7. NEW BUSINESS A. Lakewood's Wadsworth and Kipling Corridor Studies There was discussion of the Lakewood's Wadsworth and Kipling Corridor Studies. Commissioner COLLINS moved and Commissioner PLATTER seconded that EDARC recommend that the consultant retained for the City of Wheat Ridge Wadsworth Boulevard Conidor Study include in the scope of work an actual sampling/survey of drivers using Wadsworth to determine where the traffic is originating and terminating. The survey shall include sampling of major intersections with Wadsworth at 44th Avenue, 38th Avenue and 26th Avenue. The motion carried 6-0 with Commissioners BEHM, DREW and MATTHEWS absent. B. Economic Devetopment Section of Draft Comprehensive Plan/Results of Draft Comprehensive Plan Public Meetings The economic development section of the draft Comprehensive Plan as well as the results of public meetings held on the drafr Comprehensive Plan were reviewed and discussed by the Commission.. C. New Printing of Business-to-Business Directory There was a consensus of the Commission to direct staff to publish a current business-to business directory. These directories list all businesses in Wheat Ridge by category and are distributed to all businesses in Wheat Ridge. There are also copies available for the public at the municipal building. D. Implementation of a Modest Fee for New Applications for ESTIP, Business Development Zone and Tax Increment Financing There was a consensusof the Commission to discuss this subject at a future date. E. Discuss Formulation of a Business Plan The development of a business development plan for the City of Wheat Ridge was considered. Discussion included suggestions that EDARC members contact other EDARC Minutes Page 2 6/30/98 " municipalities regarding their business development plans, possibly attending some of their meetings; and that Alan White possibly contact members of the Regional Planning and - Advisory Committee in regazd to other municipalities' business development plans. There was consensus of the Commission to consider the suggestions mentioned above as well as other suggestions and ideas for discussion at the next EDARC meeting. F. 44th Avenue Merchants Mr. Orner advised that the 44th Avenue Merchants (businesses on 44th Avenue between Wadsworth and Kipling), under the direction of Ron Bernal, held a free public barbecue and raffle on Saturday, June 27. It was the consensus of the Commission that Mr. Omer draft a letter from EDARC to the 44th Avenue Merchants commending their business improvement efforts and also recommended that Mr. Bernal be considered to receive a business recognition award from the Wlieat Ridge City Council. There was further consensus to drafr another letter from EDARC to all businesses along 44th advising them of services available to them through the City of Wheat Ridge. G. EDARC Meeting Schedule It was the consensus of the Commission to meet the last Tuesday of each month with the next meeting to be held on July 28, 1998. 8. EXECUTIVE SESSION The executive session was not held. 9. ADJOURNMENT It was moved by Commissioner KIPLINGER and seconded by Commissioner BURKEPILE to adjourn the meeting at 9:30 p.m. The motion carried 6-0 with Commissioners BEHM, DREW and MATTHEWS absent. Jerry Roach Chairman C:\Barbaa~ECODEVOU9IN UTES\960G70.wpd Ann Lazzeri Recording Secretary EDARC Minutes Page 3 6/30/98 City of Wheat Ridge P._lanning and Development Department Memorandum TO: Economic Development and Revitalization Commission FROM: Martin Orner, Economic Develo.pment Specialist SUBJECT:: . C-470/Northwest Park-rvay Chronotogy DATE: July 21, 1998 Per the Commissions reguest at the June 30 EDARC meeting, I have compiled what I believe is an accurate summary of the major factors influencing the current status of the C-470/Northwest Pazkway issue. The chrono(ogy is provided as the attached documentation. Currendy, the process for achieving real progress on this subject roadway is on hold until the affected counties and cities reach agareement on funding and voting procedures. I hope you will review the attached documentation so that we may discuss this subject at the July 28 EDARC meeting. Attachments c: Alan White . . • - i~~u ~cytl G JUN 19 '98 12: 16 CITY OF SOULDER, p,z/3 `1~'7 Dan Corson, Counciimember Thomas E!dridge, Councilmember 8ob Greenlea, Mayor Spenser Havlick, Councilmember T7T BOIJLDER ~ Richard Lopez, Councilmember Donald Mxk, Councilmember llsa Morzel, CounciEmember ~ C7TY COUNCiL OFFICE Gordon Riggle, Councilmamber William Toor, Deputy Mayor Juae 19, 1998 Mr. GuIllermo V. Vidal . Executive Direcior Colorado Deparunent oFTransportarion 4201 Fasi Azlcamas Avenne Tkaver, Colorado 80222 Re: Northwest Parkway Feasibility Siudy Scopiug Process DearMr. Vidal: We Fue writino to register our conceras regarding the scoping process for the Northwest Pazkway Feasibility Study. Our concems are the project limits of the Feasibility Study, the reqauemeni to pay a portion of the Feasibility Study in order to be a vodng member of the policy group, and thc amount wiuch each community wi11 need to pay for a full vote. , Iairially the project limits for the Feasibility Study included a comprehensive study of the northwest 4uadrant with the souihern terminus being identified ai the T 70/C 470 Interchange and the norihern temunus being ideri6fied at I 25/ E 470 Interchange. Iri January, 1993 the City of Broomfield wilhdrew as one of tha sponsots of the Northwest Pazkway Fcasibility Study and announced its plans to build its own roadwaybetween 96th Street and SFI 128 without matching fedcraI funds. When the City of Broomfield withdrew as a projecf sponsor, the northem te:minus was changed from I 25/E 470 to US 36/96th Strezt Tnterctiange. The assumption made at ihat time was ihat the Northvrcst Parkw-ey would be linked to Broomfield's proposed roadway snd there was no longer e nezd to examine the area east of US 36/96th Street. We believe that thi's assumprion undermines the original intent of the Denver Regional Council of Crovemments' (DRCOG) resolution which was to study transportation . issues in the entire northwest quadrant. The interchanges Broomfield is proposing at 92nd and 98th $treets and U.S. 36 that will have enormous adverse consequences on congestion levels in the U.S. 36 corridor make the need for a comprehensive sNdy slt the more urgent To simply assume that Bmomfie]d's proposed roadway will be completed and wiil meet the needs of the statounding communities is shorLsighied and may be potentially disastrous. If we do not study the northwest quadrant as a whole, the Feasibility Study will be flawed and incomplete. We recommend chanoino the project limiu of the Fea,eibility Study at the northem terminus from US 36/96th Saeet Interchange back to the T 25/E 4701nterchange. P.O. Boz 791 • Boulder, Colorudo 80306-0791 -(303) 441-3002 • Pax (303) 441-4478 • httpJ/bcn.boulder.co.us/bouldec JG-N 19 '98 12:16 CITY OF BOULDER - P.3/3 Our second Concem reiates to the requirement to pay for e portion of the Feasibility Study in order to Ix a voP.ng member of the policy group. Tn the couse of the scoping process, the decision making structure for the Feasibility Study was identified to ineiude a steerino committee and a policy govp. AII deeisions would initially go to the steering eommiaee and if consensus conceming these decisions could not be reached then the unresolved issues would go to the policy gToup for resolution. If consensus could not Lx reached by the policy group, then the policy ,,roup would vote and the majority vote would rule. The steering, committee would be comprised of everyone inyolved in the scoping process and the poIicy group would include only commuaities willino to pay a portion of the costs of thz reasibiliry Study or in lieu o£paying to pazricipatc, affcacd pardcs would receive one votc for their respzctive counry. For us, this meant that Boulder County and t6e Cities of Boulder, Louisville, Lafayette, and the Town of Superior would have one collective vote on tha policy group. During the scoping process, we along with other com.munities voiced our outrage over this "pay to , play" concept. One vote ior five entities is not acceprable either. As reprzsentztives for communities that depend on the U.S. 36 Highway as our primary connection to Denver, we are very concemed about additional traffic genzrated by the proposed alignmenu and land use implicauons. Some of the proposed alignmenis go through both Boulder Counry and City of Bouldzr open space. Membership on the policy grouo is crucial for viable representation of our communiries' rzspective interesLs. Bzcause our communities wi31 be heavily impacted by the outcome of the Feasibility Study, we are willing to consider the "pay to play" oprion, but as public officiais cannot entertain a blank check and do not fmd the concept of having to pay for.the privileoe of votin; palatable in a public forum. The question which still remains unanswered is how much does a commtmity have to pay to be a voting mem}xr of Lhe policy group? Thank you for soliciting comments. PIe trust that all comments will be forwarded to and considered by DRCOG before we move into the next phase oFihe Feasibiliry Study o£the Northwest Pazkway. Sincerely, . - -----------r William R. Toor Deauty Mayor Gity of Boulder Paul Danish County Commissioner Boulder County cc: T.any Warner, CDOT Region 6 DRCOG Board of Directors Robezt D, Fazley, DRCOG Executive Director Northwest Pazkway Feasibility Study Scoping Committee Members $oulder City Council Boulder Counry Commissioners 7500 WEST 29TH AV6VUE '+`McAt-RIDGE, CO 802 7 5-671 3 (303) ?3:-55C0 City Admin. Fax R 23+-5923 Tne Crt/ of GWh e at GRidge GREfCHEN CERVELJY AuYOR June 18, 1993 Palice D?pG F=_x : 235-29-9 ` W Laurence E. Warner Region 6 Director Colorado Dept. of Transportation 2000 South Holly Street Denver, CO 80222 f70N PATERA . WdN0.15.~NG CRYTriEASIIqER CRYUS.iK COUNCIL MEM9Efl5 a:ma i o;xr~ m JERPYOfiULL10 JANELLE5IUVER LLOYO A DONNELLY' ppN EAFqpRI DistAn n - Dxric rv KEN 9LER TERI OR9'cC PALPHF.M?NCINEW CLIUDIAt4ORTH Dear Larry: At the conclusion of the June 3, Northwest Parl.way feasibility study meeting, Bill Vidal invited the participants to send any final comments on the draft scope of work to your attention for inclusion in the report. Following are comments of the City of Wheat Ridge that we would like to see included in the report or if need be, discussed at a future rrieeting. Contract administration. Given the history of this project and the obvious feazs and suspicions present within the process to date, we believe it appropriate that thz ultimate policy cominittee for ihe feasibility study be charged with both hiring and the supervision of the consultant(s) that would be used on this particular project. Ministerial functions, such as meeting notices and preparation of agendas could be handled by DRCOG. 2. Inasmuch as a number ofjurisdictions may be providing funding for this study, it would be appropriate for DRCOG to be the designated agency to hold all participants funds and to dispense monies at the direction of the Feasibility Policy Committee. Any participating member would be expected to pay up front the fuli amount of their contribution with no ability to withdraw funds once the project had commenced. This feature may be particularly important given the extreme range of positions which are present in the process and in order to keep all of the participants at the table for the entire process. Inclusion ofBroomfield.section of road in the study area. It has been stated repeatedly by the City ofBroomfield that their section ofthe parkway (linking I-25 and Jefferson County 123) is not subject to analysis or review inasmuch as it is a local road and completely within the purview and jurisdiction of the City of Broomfield. However, given the nature of the discussion and the anticipation tha[ this section of roadway will serve truly a regional purpose, this section of roadway needs to be added to the study area so that the Northwest Parkway and the northwest quadrant analysis is a comprehensive whole rather than fragmented pieces with at least one important segment already - REGYCIEDPAPER predetemiined. Wheat Ridge appreciates that this is questioning what has been assumed to be a -iven in the process to date. However, no real attention has been focused on the distinction between a local versus a regiona] facility. Broomfield has consistently maintained that the road segment is a local road, however the regiona] function at a future point is inescapable and clearly anticipa[ed.. Even the presence of the road segment as purely local should be recognized in the study as even at this level there will be an impact on transportation in the quadrant. If an additional meeting to follow up on these or other concems expressed by participants in the process is necessary, Wheat Ridge is certairily willing to attend. If you have questions or we can clarify any ofthese points please do not hesitate to contact me or the City Manager, Bob Mddaugh. _ Sin }q,, ~h/~- ..QJGeJ retchen Cerveny Mayor, City of Wheat Ridge cc: R. Middaugh, City Mgr. J. DiTullio, Councilmember "TJae Carnation Citv" A REQUEST FOR PROPOSAL FOR PROFESSIONAL SERVICF.S- PARKWAY FEASIBILITY STUDX JEFFERSON COUNTY, COLORADO 1 st Drafl - May 12, 1998 2nd Draft - May 22, 1998 3rd Draft - June 7, 1998 = NORTHWEST P?.RI.'WAY FEASIBILITY STUDY SECTION 1 PROJECT SPECIFIC INFORNIATION 1.01 Planned Improvements The general planned improvement is to develop altematives to address the existirig and future mobility issues in the northwest quadrant of the metro-Denver area, more specifically, within Jefferson Counry. 1.02 Project Goal The work is intended to produce the following improvements: - Increased mobility - Improved safety - Higher level of service 1.03 Project Location The project location and limits for the Feasibility Study consist of the southem terminus being identified at the I 70/C 470 Interchange and the northem terminus being identified at the US 36/96th Street Interchange. The Feasibility Smdy wi(I investigate various altematives to connect the two termini, with no specific alignment being identified. At the southem terminus, construction is underway by the Colorado Department of Transportation (CDOT) for the C 470 Extension, which will extend C 470 northerly to US 6. At the northem terminus, construction is underway by the City of Broomfield to extend 96th Street southerly to SH 128. The Feasibility Study should assume that both improvements aze in place and open to traffia 1.04 Project Cost The project cost is not determined at this time. 1.05 Work Duration The time period for the work described in this scope is approximately _ cafendar days. _ Northwest Parkway Study Area ~ 36 ' R Nine* ile , orner~____ . ~1NaY.enberg Tonville -J. ~ 70 E - -----37 S Boulder Rd ` ~ ~ [ Prp o d ) .B i ' TLouisvil e \ ~ ghton~--~ r - - • ~ ~ ` 152nd Av . _ - f . ~ Marshall . perior MersJqILeke ~ W 136th Xv • e o• ' °j /51 N-----;-- - v ; K C~ E BrW r lId k A m i (Prop td fHi a e; ~ H ndersoh nmtnf) - I I ~ -~orthg~len o 12ofh AYC Q Wa ce ~II_ age : i ~ ~ ~ . . s . . i . neHeghis . p ~Y2 19 ~1 19hLS~ ~ Olld E SBth Ave I ~~o~o: ort- 2 Irondale T ~ ~ TUDY UMITS - rie~vroo / a I sf amsCit Pena Ivd r y ' ~rceC rtyT' O m s, _hea ieo ithl.~d~ . C.• a~j+'.%%;~~" _ Mon v bw Blvd i i ~ ~ r,lea.,,~. ' d9 t~!ont : . ' ' . rnra z i,_T~ . ~ . • ~ ~ ' p,pc I ~ 8 I _ 1 JO v Ala~ eda Av6 V ( 121 ' . ' ~Y .i,.. - . 4y . - as .r~~„' >~.'-,•~.c _ _ C470 W. ~ 1 ~ ea (Urdo- Caruhvd~an) °7 )dl eda~¢rt. v E Ili J o . ~ . ~ n law e I ~ ' t' I M I ~ ~ L.e~ n ' ~f Gree VI a ~ ~ Qi / ~ 177 . Tny own mo 'liwin Forks i lu n VelleY A~nna na R~~ -t EC R ~ Ar.69uia. ~ . . . 127 ' . 'Q . Bfker Deermont 36 ~ • ' rr. parker Rd _ ~Crdchell er i ~ ' ~ om 2 . 4 6 e 10 12 1-~06 Consultant Responsibility The consultant is responsible for: - Project Documentation and Document Control - Feasibility Study 1.07 Work Product The consultant work products are: - Project Schedu(e, Management and Coordination - Reports 1.08 Work Product Completio❑ All submittals must be accepted by.the Jefferson County Conh-act Administrator or his designee. 1.09 Additional Project Informatio❑ Additional information regarding this work is included in the fol(owing documents: W 470 Comdor Report Final Study - DRCOG Vision 2020 Plan - Previous CDOT As-Constructed Plans - Others??? 1.10 Scope of Work Organization This draft scope of work has been cazefully reviewed by Jefferson County and reflects a p(an approach based on the known goals. One factor determining the selection of a Consultant is the ability of that Consultant to analyze the project goals, eva(uate the work elements, and formulate a work plan. This process may produce new approaches or modification to the project work elements. Because ofthat, alf consultants should be awaze that the Final Scope of Work for a project will be produced with the input of the selected Consultant. ###k########+k~k~k~k*####t###?I'####~k#~k~k#t#k##k#######t####~kM~kM####rt#rt#~kke####k##### SECTION2 PROJECT NIAIVAGEINIENT AiD COORDINATION 2.01 Jefferson County Contacts. The Contract Administrator for this project is: Active day-to-day administration of the contract will be delegated to: Name: Title: Address: Telephone: Fax: 2.02 Project Coordinatio❑ It was determined during the scoping meetings that all interested entities are to be included in the process. The Feasibility Study will utilize a committee structure for providing agency input, technical review and decision making. A Steering Committee wilf include entities who participated in the process to develop the Scope of Work for the Feasibility Study. The objective of the Steering Committee will be to provide technical review and agency input for the Feasibility Study. The goal of the Steering Committee will be to strive for consensus when decisions aze required. A Policy Committee will include all entities located within the study area or entities who have chosen to participate in the funding for the Feasibility Study. The objective of the Policy Committee will be to provide policy-tevel decision making for the Feasibility Study. The decision making process for the Policy Committee has yet to be determined. The opportunity to serve on the Steering Committee will be offered to the following organizations as a minimum: City of Arvada City of Boulder City of Broomfield Town of Erie City of Golden City of Lafayette City of Lal:ewood City of Louisville Town of Superior , City of Thomron City of Westminster City of Wheat Ridge Adams County Boulder County Jefferson County Colorado Department of Transportation (CDOT) Regional Transportation Dishict (RTD) Denver Regional Council of Govemments (DRCOG) E 470 Authority Local Neighborhoods and businesses Raikoad Companies US Army Corps of Engineers Urban Drainage & Flood Control Dishict (iJD & FCD) Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) Utility Companies Colorado Division of Wild(ife The opportunity to serve on the Policy Committee is currently limited to the following entities: Jefferson County City o f Arvada City of Broomfiefd ~ City of Golden City of Westminster . City of Wheat Ridge #~k4#####t#t####t##i~~k####k#######k#R#k#~kit####t###~R1~#~k#tR+k~k#rt#4~k#~R##rt#~k###k# SECTION 3 PROJECT DESCRIPTION 3.01 Bacl:ground On February 19, 1997, the Denver Regional Council of Govemments (DRCOG) Board of Directors adopted a resolution to adopt the Fiscal Yeaz 1997-2002 Transportation Improvement Program (TIP). The following is an excerpt from the resolution: _ Be it further resolved, that funding for the SH-93/Northwest Pazlavay Feasibility Study (97-027) is programmed in federal FY 1999 (beginning October 1, 1998) and; consequently, the project must be reconfirmed in the 1999-2004 TIP. This situation provides sufficient time for the affected cities and counties to establish a mechanism for addressing their respective issues about the project. Prior to DRCOG Board adoption of the 1999-2004 TiP the parties aze asked: 1. To establish by majority an agreement defining the structure and organization for carrying out the feasibility study and; 2. To prepaze a scope of work for the study. The DRCOG Board will use the agreement and scope of work as a basis for including study funding in the 1999-2004 TIP. In January, 1998, the City of Broomfield chose to withdraw as one of the project sponsors for the Northwest Pazk,vay Feasibility Study leaving Jefferson County as the remaining sponsor. As a result, the project limits of the Study were redefined to include only the Jefferson County poriion Beginning in March, 1998, the Colorado Department of Transportation (CDOT) facilitated meetings to piepare the scope of work for the Northwest Pazkway Feasibility Study. The following scope of work was prepazed as a result of those meetings and includes input from the affected cities in the azea. 3.02 Project Limits The project limits for the Feasibility Study consist of the southem terminus being identified at the I 70/C 470 Interchange and the northem terminus being identified at the US 36/96th Street Interchange. The Feasibility Study will investigate various altematives to connect the two termini, with no speciFc alignment being identified. At the southem terminus, construction is underway by CDOT for the C 470 Extension, which will extend C 470 northerly to US 6. At the northem terminus, construction is undenvay by the City of Broomfield to extend 96th Street southerly to SH 128. The Feasibility Study should assume that both improvements are in place and open to traffic. 3.03 Work Elements - Project Mana~ement, Coordination, and Documentation - Feasibility Study - Cost Estimates - Public Involvement . _ **#x**:*:**~***~*r******a*******:**r*:******~****:*r**:**********:****:xs**:: SECTION 4 ADDITIONAL INFORiVIATION 4.01 Purpose of Study The purpose of the Northwest Pazkway Feasibility Study is to identify the appropriate locally preferred transportation altematives for.the corridor. The Feasibility Study should investi.-ate all possible transportation altematives, including a full range of options from a no-build to multi-modal altematives. The Feasibility Study does not advocate for the project and is not a commitment to proceed to implementation. The Feasibility Study should be an open process which includes community input and public participation. The Feasibility Study is the initial step in the sequence of required actions for a proposed major project. A Feasibility Study does not replace an Environmental Impact Statement (EIS). The DRCOG Metro Vision 2020 is the region's long range vision plan for the future. The plan reflects the intecrelationships that exist between land use and the transportation network. To be consistent with the plan, the Northwest Pukway Feasibility Study will need to address land use as it relat'es to each of the transportation altematives. 4.02 Public Involvement Public invotvement will be developed after initial scoping meetings and shall identify and describe the public and agency involvement process. Respondents shafl identify the means by which they will assure that community leaders, groups and the general public are afforded opportunities to participate in the study process. Respondents shall describe specific activities, techniques, format, number of ineetings, etc. to ensure an open and proactive public involvement process that facilitates consensus development. The respondents will need to work closely with Jefferson County staff and previously identifed local communities to develop a public involvement plan. Examples of various pub(ic involvement options aze listed for information only: Public meetings Citizen's Advisory Committee (CAC) Design charettes Open houses Neighborhood meetings Workshops `-='--4~03=ProjECtRelated Goals - Provide resolution to the existing mobility problems on regional and local roads. Re.-ional roads include roadways such as Wadsworth Boulevazd and Sheridan Boulevard. - Provide better access to major highways, including 125, 170, US 36 and C 470. Provide altemate route to driving through Denver. - Provide more direct access to Denver Intemational Airport (DIA) for both travelers and shipment of goods and services. - Provide relief of congestion without promoting growth. - Provide altemative that would support projected land use. - Provide altemative with consisient design continuity and emphasis on safety improvement. - Provide altemative that minimally increases and ideally reduces metro-wide vehicle miles traveled (VMT) - Provide for a long-term solution. - Provide relieFof traffic congestion while maintaining quality of life for all communities. - Provide altemative with minimal impact to local arterial system - attempt to reduce congestion'on the local arterial system. - Provide altemative which reduces air pollution. - Provide altemative that reduces the reliance on the automobile. - Provide for more efficient use of existing transportation system. Specificafly, an altemative that incocporates Intelligent Transportation Systems (ITS). - Provide altemative that improves arterials. - Provide altemative. that does not impact open space land or wildlife habitat. - Provide altemative that adequately addresses stormwater runoff. 4.04 Concerns to be Addressed Air quality conformity Noise mitigation (maintain or improve quality of life) Limited access Aesthetically pleasing Safety • Maintainable Provides trails and linl:ages of trails Funding options Congestion on local road system Land use Traffic impacts (includes land use options and future transpoRation improvements) Wildlife Open Space Property Rights Movement of goods and services Sepazation of neighborhoods from the community . =_;_4;05-'Alfernatives: What alternatives do.rve want considered? No build Altemative modes ITS Strategies Transportation System Management (TSM) improvements No build with resh-icted land use (purchase developer rights) Build highway with restricted land use (purchase.developer rights) , No Build with improvements to existing aiterial roadways ' Altemative alignments to Northwest Pazkway Mass transit solution High Occupancy Vehicle (HOV) lanes Improved bus service Demand management solutions 4.06 Assessment Factors CostlBenefit ratio Impacts to communities Impacts to air quality Impacts to land use VMT reduction Average length of trip Levels of service on highway systems including 170,125 and major arterials Economic impact Reduction of peak hour delays and reduction of peak period length Change in community chazacter ~ Impacts to open space Impacts to wildlife Effect of modal shift Address mitigation on any disturbed contaminated soils Funding sources Tne Ci,v ,r 7500 WEST'_9TH aV'civJc bvH AT 91D1o° (30602 56?13 Gry Atlmun Fnc ' 23: 592- March 24_ 1998 Ms. Jeanie Rossillon `Design and Review Engineer Highway and Transportation Jefferson County 7 1 .pn~, PULG] n••a: F... - ~l_ 100 Jefferson County Pkwy., Suite 3500 Golden, CO 80419 Dear Jeanie: ';Wheat GRidge This letter is in response to the County's request for co-sponsorship of four projects that are being submitted by the County for the 1999 to 2004 TIP. 1. NORTHWEST PARKWAY FEASIBILITY STUDY: Given the current status of discussion on this project and the likelihood that supplemental funds will be requested from DRCOG in the event the one-half million dollar appropriation is exceeded, joint funding is premature. The City does anticipate participation in the Northwest Parkway Feasibility Study process, and at some point in time if supplemental funds aze needed from participating municipalities, we will reconsider the request. 2. JEFFCO TRANSIT STUDY: The City Council is very supportive of mass transit and would like to support efforts in this area. Of Principal concern to the City is the level of imolvement by RTD. We strongly believe that RTD must be higtily involved and potentially the lead agency in order to have a successfui transit study undertaken. If a transit study with significant RTD involvement can be developed, the City would support such a study effort. 3. PARATRANSIT: There is no support from the City Council on this particular item. 4. TRAFF.IC CONGESTION MANAGEMENT: The City Council supported the traffic congestion management project and indicated that finan¢ial support would also be likely. The City Council did have a concern that the City of Wheat Ridge as well as other municipal cost participation be equitable and recognize municipal concern regarding the payment of County taxes and duplicate participation in projects of County-wide interest. In reviewing the January 9, 1998, project funding request, we found that there were significant differences between the request for support and funding, and the actual projects that have been C, : ~ :•e.~ - ==sutiriiitfed to DRCOGin the TIP process. The difference in numbers was of some concern to the City Council members and in that we had no specific information as to the nature of change, it made our discussion and consideration somewhat difficult. If I can provida any additional information, please do not hesitate to contact me. Sincerely, Robert C. Middaugh City Manager cc: Bob Goebel, Director ofPublic Works L323 ..77rr- ('cri•nnlrnii ('i,, u : Ro~xd thc~t wo ~cl~ die bv Jecqui 9<ott Om: chere wss sepoui:d ro Se a road n:uced R'_'70. %'ama kil!cd iu 7mcosed iur.din;. Thm t`erc wss ro be a coad ealkd NortSwe>e Pakway. Such m uomar eonsumed ihe pukw'vy plv;nin; ESX it is paliticnllv inmtrco ro speil (he -ord;. A mad dxs exin in the wry a(ignment of those two eabao drea+n coads. [cs moniku is Colondo Highway 93. Highu'ay 93 is onc of e.5e mosz dangerous high- wayt in th< scue. The temin is fU[ and ..'ind-sw'ept. Then iis curvy and mounuinout. B<cause oC snowy whi[e- owr. o-eacSerous bla<k ice.6nin-d<ad commuters and speeding drvnka [he road claims li•es lxtween Goldm and Baulderevcry Yeat . I f wdh bodh sid<s ofLhe yelloW lines blaafied ss a ba<kdmp. tM1e Gerce baal< over . 6iggec bctwr. wider. iwikcr mad ne.er di<> do..n, oNy th< name of the superroad chumg<>. This 6cvn1 road and th< bmni tight Eo halc ii ;":on 4co^.;a5 the a:sen !:t ut Fe D<v.e: ci.um~:v:i~ 4l[wa}' i: che m? s:orv o[ 1997. Ic Cortc_:ed Lhe ~C:a:ion oi ~l^au evar: ;i:v in le:T:rsan Cuunty. Samcl:r. An'ad1 war:i c`c pa:Fwav. P..it apn, Iin,+, :a,^.,qWs<nce ot n:igSSurSua.it nc:G' n r.di. ir.dviuiy nc bsse zu,ay ior iumr_:in ur' vi ~adn hss lus:ed aitu ici savior. cSe 1<i:crson Cen«r. iur sa long. itcsi E xe pssc N<COihr si;ns ro unCeaund ottzer euiei oppo>ition. The 1<ff<aon Cenrr is routed to 4 the Dcnva Tcch Ccnm: of Ehe tucur_. abng will all its mr:ic. In i[s Ceiense. ?.rv2da M1at wamhed Ulcewopl annex itseli intu fimn<ial subi(iry. Iis womhed Guluen r.C:•<lap iarli inro a ehamdng. EesvaSl< homerown. ArvaCa belie+es ii s Amdi s wm ro progresa. ConriveE on Peqe i ...a i r r %..7 a, 1(.a 1.[1 Y► Q S' • The road that won't die r~;: , aut nt_e~,e r;ie tSe timoL-;c~:on [h_o ~ sup<rhigSwav :Smu;h :Sat Ais:onc saal1 m..n woulC c5ange Gui.:i i penan_liry . -alliorArv_di36cnetit ' Goiden u-anc:.{,,y!y co handle th<l:i•':rson Cenaer tniFic on Arvada roads. Only pmhl,m it: Gu1Cen dxsn't sccm ro rtugnize . that it has aimos[ aingle- : handedly eompleeed one- half o( Nat beit.av. Goldcn iou;ht ior and ' Won ihe Nnding eonstcue• (ion or a c470 e:«nsion tM1at will h th< first IinA in Ne wesam leg of this . embanled heltw~y. Th<C-370emension ~iil link [h<existing Southuat itq or me Nrt-aY to us. Hi3hway 6. U.S. BS fOOf lN<f aIready cvn throu;h Gold<n . on the alignmcnt o(any fumrc 6ei(way. U.S.6joins 97 via Ehe Galden bypsss. Atl [hu is rcmiinmg w complcte'i chcap man'S' beltw.y amund Denver is i conneciion up nonh (o E. 470. Existing'wdt will do the rest. Thu nonhcrn eonn<aiun is a rop Broomlield goal. 8roomficld rcsidrnu -crc hesium about ihe \orthWea, Park.ay umil th<ir demnnds for opcn space w surtound it and - so(mn it5 impa<u verc h<ard vW heeded 6y the Broomf mld olficiols Nowlhctlmomficld c.~1 plan is aeeep~ed by rcsi- denu.lavedbrplanners ` 11'`<1~~.~. and ua(fic cnginan and `I mayyeamWdfor e°° PoNR 511(.'CrtOiE COII. swnion. ° ~r`/ Yotr<ry city.haw' '^cs ev<r, hss room Io pur. ' chsse opcn spxe along. oid<apmposedbcltway. f~ Mcn)_ 1 µ'he.tRidqeia amongGoldcn't ✓''K~~- ~ s[mngcst allics in thc . ifigM against thc ~ Northwest Parkway, k'heat Ridg< Wams eiisling mads improved 4 I now_mt.itvys. mon<y wssttd on a bel4 Waythatwillonlrmsult '"~u•~ •S'' inrtarcspowl. R'heu Ridge Wann j . aliexietingnonh-im,h eortidars improved, with adequam aceess ess1 and N wul.lisfightinyhand - ' . ~1elGoiden imhand wich Galden on thn(mnt. k'heat Ridge is a (oo- mcr`uralcommunity thm now is landlaked i~ and is dissecccd by <v<ryoneelsisehrouyh tra(fic, which <hanqcs Base map for proposeEa tM1CRf50lIJIilYOf lAi3 aiqnmenuaumeasrol older eommunityi pcse(ul, neighborhowl pcrsona. It wu in 19971hat the 1.(f.rson Counly <om. missioners opcnly Jeelarcd the YonhwesE Pukway one o(iu prioriiiex. II was in 1997 ihat a Counrywide Tr nsponmion Plan auempteJ m include (he Varthwest Parkway {n ps prjoriti<s. So heamd wu the iestimony abou[ the park- way and the leffeo plnn that Ihe mau mcrnt dnlt doasn't mention a pahway at all. It ealls !or 'so(eiy improvemrnti ia 93. and aIlxhe.i pro anJ eon pakway position paNn. . Plonncrs am alr.iJ the uproar ovcr Ihe pork• ' ~ IN _ y 6Vheat Ridge is amoag Gofden's strongest allies ii: the fig1i1 agaii:st tl:e tVortkwest Parkrvay. lVheat Rldge wants existing roads improv- ed now - no1, it says, masey wasted on a beltway tltat wifl a:ly result in more sprnwl. x-_r -ould pr_.:n[ c1e rst ;:on Scios v2o?m.i. So . r'.:~Sxk:Coriv':alir.; "i:i ie. 7h_c phn hn>>urTe::C iu ;Sare oi bL^ck crc.'Lie Sar.S..<s[ Pvk.•'.r leic a bi; hrviu. but >o did the Cci:n ot RTD'S ncini, pro- gnm im liyht nii. Guide the Ride. The Countywide Tnmportatian Plan incluCcS a yoal of a 7% Shi(t a..ay (rom curt:nt sin- qle-w;upancy vehicle inv. <1 lereli. . . W ithout light niL that myv be a ul I order. Thc plan is beiny rc-od:ed and will he prc. uneM ro ihe lei(enon - Counr. 8mrd of Commissionen and .II eiry eouwils in feR.o in ihe OCw' vG](. ?Icanahil<. propon<nb oi the Vorthwest PakWay are li.ting their most rccem woundz and plan- niny m Gght lurd (or sakry impm.emenls (or High,y 93. .Nobady on <ithcr siJe bclic.ns ihey have hesd the Imt o! «'470, \onh.<s[ P.rkway. an improred 93 or wlumver neW name Will come for (his rwd chat will me di<. G is the ecmeryiece for the gmwth vs. wi• grow-th kcttle brcving (or the xao cenmry, rhich ssks: j..n' .."vv\5 Nonn..est Parkway wnp Wntminsiar's prelerreE Fa<ky Flau mown in pocaC line. • If yau 6uiIJ murt anJ huer m+Ja, will thry eume! • I( rau rcfuve m builJ mort anJ bcncr maJr. will ihcy gu away, 7hc Vanh W w P,rkWay <mbodics all o( ihe cvcial debatcs ollc0'<non County i immedinie lumm: li(estyle, qroWih. cart vs. mus Innsil, oNn spvtt.laa bi.e anJ tili<rn acti.ixm. Uliimnely. the Jcbme m.ty hclp answer quc,. tiun<!ar lelfco: Who arv vc.' \Yha Jo we wam Io b< in ihc luture'.' fluw Ju w,; s« thcre! DRCOG 1997-2002 TIP Pian Testimony by . j ; the City of Broomfield - January 15, 1997 - - • :.I. : Broomfield supports the Northwest Parkway The City of Broomfield believes the Northwest Parkway is instrumental to implementation of a successfui community development and transporYafion vision in the northwest greater Denver metropolitan area. With a substantial portion of the proposed parkway traversing through our city boundaries, we consider it critical to maintaining a prosperous economy and livable communities within Broomfield and in Boulder, Jefferson and Adams County. Therefore, we strongly support the inclusion of the Northwest Parlcway in the 1997-2002 Transportation Improvement Plan. Moreover, in light of increasing transit and transportation demands in the northwest metro area - evidenced by overflowing park'n'ride facilities and increased travel to DIA - we believe the timing of the feasibility study should be accelerated. As the primary study sponsor, Broomfield has begun work with its public and private partners in planning a parkway. that is a model for extensive open space and community buffers, planned commercial development centers, and integration of inter- and multi-modal elements. After two years of extensive citizen involvement - resulting in the erractment of Broomfield's 1995 master plan - our residents endorsed the parkway as an integral piece of, . a carefully planned community development vision. Inside our boundaries, the Northwest Parkway is as much a"local bypass" to efficiently move commuters and goods, as much as it is a"missing link" in the completion of the regional beltway system for metropolitan Denver. Furthermore, the parkway - in no way - is intended to be a lightning rod for unattractive strip development or unbridled growth, but instead will serve as the backbone for smart growth management in the southwest comer of Boulder County. We increasingly recognize Boulder and Jefferson County's national prominence as an attractive location for the advanced technology companies of :he 21st century. Therefore, we can no longer assume that the efficient movement of key goods and services to DIA will happen by itself. _ ff we do, we put at risk the maintenance of the proper balance between environmental quality, livable communities and a healthy industrial.base in the northwest region - qualities which make this region an attractive location in the first place. The Northwest Parlcway is pivotal to maintaining this delicate balance. II. "Not iust a Hiqhway" - A Transportation 5vstem Our residents and businesses have set increasingly higher expectations for non-congested streets and arterials, public transit access, open space corridors, recreation trails and greenbelts. We incorporated the parkway into our master plan in such a way that it will• enhance all of 2 . these needs. In addition to serving as a traditional collector for intra-city _ and inter-city traffic, the parkway wiil provide numerous park'n'ride access ; points within our city - starting first with the "flagship" transit facility at the 96th Street interchange. Over the last three years, acquisition of 300 foot right-of-way and open space parcels along the route has laid the groundwork for linking together the extensive regional.trails network now emerging between. Boulder, Jefferson and Adams counties. Finaliy, the parkway wili reduce the air quality impacts of inter-city traffic and mitigate the effects of stop-and-go traff-ic and congested intersections as we put in place more livable community centers. We anticipate using Yhe model provided by tfis Foothilis Parkway in Boulder and expanding upon it. III. A key inqredient in land use planninq in Boulder County The NorthwesY Parkway will heip guide a sensible land use future rather than being overtaken by it .This is why Broomfield, Lafayette, Louisville and Boulder County have been engaged in . extensive negotiations over the ultimate designation of land use,. open space, community buffers and annexation policy. While we have succeeded in some areas - and continue ongoing negotiations - this should not cause us to sit on our hands, but instead, plan a par{cway in parallel with pending intetgovemmental issues. In the view of :Broomfield, the Northwest Parlcway is "not jusf a road widening," but a, key piece of a larger community vision. Broomfield's commiYment to a"systems approach" is evidenced by the role of the parkway in our master plan. In addition, hundreds of acres of open space have been, or are, in the process of being 3 acquired along the route. While right-of-way and open space purchases ; - arE key to the highway's construction, these acquisitions were equaily motivated by a desire to create community..buffers, transit stations, trail connections and highway greenbe►ts. IV. Components of the FeasibilitV Study Broomfield has begun discussions with adjacent govemments, private sector interests and DRCOG staff to define the precise scope of the study. We strongly believe the study must take a comprehensive sysfems approach rather than the simple analysis of expansion of a highway segment In addition, we aiso recognize the distinctly different character of various segments of the paricway along its entire length. For example, Broomfield's segment, which stretches from U.S. 36 to I-25, has features far different from the needs of the City of Golden and JefFerson County. Therefore, tfie study must be comprehensive, yet allow for a segmented analysis of the parkway in order to achieve appropriate solutions for each ` of the communities along the route. We anticipate the following study components. -Multi-Modal fnteqration: In cooperation with the RTD Guide _ and Ride Process, we have begun to explore expanded intra- city bus services to feed into the main park'n'ride facilities along the route. Environmental Impacts: While some may argue tfiat the parkway will exacerbate growth, VMT and congestion, we 4 contend that the net resuit will be a reduction in congestion, stop-and-go traffic and vehicle emissions. Routinq Refinements:....The.Broomfield segment _is, for the most part determined, but we have begun to further refine remaining segments still in question. Seqment Analysis: We will seek the involvement of all corridor communities to cooperatively address their particular land use and routing needs. Interchanqes and Enqineerinq Desiqn: The location of interchanges will be instrumental in creating a parkway vision which is both limited access and conducive to targeted commercial and community development. Fir.ancial and Demand Analysis: We have begun to update the estimates on VMTs, in anticipation of the completion of the final section of the E-470 highway. Our financial analysis wiii review the variety of revenue streams available - including tolls, private sector financing and other opportunities for long- term bond £nancing. Linkaqe with E-470: The connection between the parkway and E-470 at I-25 requires a•coordinated and timely approach. Discussions have already begun conceming the location of the interchange. But we must expand this discussion to ensure adequate development of inter- and multi-modal investments. 5 In conciusion, Broomfield does not believe a feasibility study is ~ premature. In fact, we belieye it is long overdue and that DRCOG should - I consider increasing its priority in the-TIP.: ! i ' I c:4rgMrcogfig.doc 6 September 24, 1997 To Whom ft May Concem: RE: Northwest Parkway The managers and administrators of local governments within Jefferson County . recognize that a great deal of time, effort and money has been expended to develop the Countywide Transportation Plan. it is of fhe utmost importance to protect the integrity of the process thaf was used in preparing this plan. ft has been a comprehensive effort, and it deserves our support. At the same time, we also rZCOg(11Z2 iilai a uISCUSS10n irnap(tBlli iG TailYjU(ISuICtIOnS is und2;way abou, th2- potentiai development of a major transportation corridor in the noRhwest quadrant of the county. in that context, we recommend that the Countywide Transportation Plan be established without Highway 93 capacity improvements included in the fiscaily constrained plan, but amended to insert a commitment on the part of the municipalities and the county to join together immediately to initiate a feasibility study of the transportation corridor which achieves consensus around the scope and time frame of such a study. If possible this study should be completed under the auspices of either the Colorado Department of Transportation.or the Denver Regional Council of Governments. We want to ensure that the best information possible will be available in a timely fashion to make the decisions necessary to resolve the northwest corridor issue. We do not want to delay the development of a northwest corridor solution, nor do we want the discussion to cloud the implementation of the Countywide Transportation Plan. By working cooperatively, we believe that we can accomplish both. . Mike Bestor N-,IIhristopher City Manager City Manager City of Golden City of Westminster r ' ocian Bob'Midda Gi y M nager . City Manager Cit Arvada City of Wheat Ridge ~,---G2,(, Ron Holliday County Administrator Jefferson County Michael . Rock City Manager City of Lakewood MEMORANDUM TO: Tim Holeman FRObI: Robert Middaugh, Wheat Ridge Ciry Manager DATE: 10/14/97 I would like to add one item to the list of concems and issues generated at the last technical comrnittee meeting as follows: The North West Pazkway should be regazded and planned as one complete project. While there.may be discussions that focus on issues associated with the Broomfield portion and the Jefferson County portion, these sepazate discussions should be viewed as a convenience orily. There should be no consideration of a portion of the project uriless the entire project has been planned, designed and approved. AuG-1i-~! I1:59 Fran:CliY Of 3,i0WIELD UC,i./ AiiNY. 30?e99,55; 1-31I P.01/04 J^5-?4i - : • w~-~- City of Braomfield oFF,CE oF ThE MAYa, a,a De9Cornhes Dfiie . P.O. Bwc 1415 • Brmmfefd. C.ctrado 8Cp3g-141 S• Phone (3p3) S39-B3Cp • FaY (303) 4b„o.g,5x FAX MEMORANDUM AUGUST 27, 1997 T0: NORTNWEST PARKWAY AFFECTED CITIES AND COUfVl'IES 80ULDER AND ADAMS COUNTY INTERESTED PARTIES . CAROLYN Bt1CHHOLZ, LAFAYETI"E, 665-2153 RON STEWART, BOULDER COUMY, 441-4525 . LESLIE QURGIN, BOULDER, 441-4478 TOM DAVIDSON, LOUISVILLE, 673-9043 MARTY FLAUM, ADAMS COUNTY, 659-0577 TED ASTi, SUPER(OR, 499-3677 MARGARET GARPENTER, 7HORNTON, 538-7562 VIC SMITH, ERIE, 665-3557 6O8 FRIE, ARVADA, 431-3911 NANCY HEIL, WESTMINSTER, 460-8714 MICHELLE LAWRENCE, JEFFERSON COUNTY, 271-8941 JAN SCHENCK, GOLDEN, 384-8001 . LINDA MORTON, LAKEWOOp, 987-7678 DAN WILDE, WHEAT R1DGE, 234-5924 GEORGE SCHEUERNSTUHL; QRCOG, 480-6790 FROM: MAYOR BILL BERENS, BROOMFIELD PN: 438-6300 SUBJ: DRCOG TRANSPORTATION iMPROVEMENT PLAN FEASIBILITY STUDY SCOPING MEETING The next meeting of the scoping cammittee for the Northwest Parkway Feasibility Study is scheduled for September 3, 1997, at 4:30 p.m., at Broomfield City Hall. At this meeting we wil( review some suggestions for the structure/organization and the scope of the study. We wlll provlde an update to DRCOG at their September 17th board meeting. As a refresher, Broomfield and Jefferson County are the two communities who asked to be formal sponsors of the Northwesf Parkway feasibility study. Our two communities have committed fo providing matching funds to suppiement 71P funding. It is expected that these monies will be approved in 1998. As the sponsoring communities, Broomfield and Jefferson 'County mutually agreed to conduct parallel but complementary scoping meetings regarding the content and ~ AUU-cI -z I i I:-: rran:CliY uF e,iGCMFIcLO MG,4./ AiiBY. 3^3_55359; i-ill P.02104 1:b-?4T Fax Memorandum August 27, 1997 = Page 2 , nature of fhe feasibility study. We believe the "Sroomfield segment' is substanfially different and more well defined than th2 "Jefferson County segment." Thersfora, Broomfield and Jeffersorl County began two separate efFotts which were to be brought together. -At the August 20, 1997, board mseting, DRCOG asked that we include the entire area and.providad us a lisf'of invitees. This _ _..effort is not meant to replaca the Jeiferson Couniy process but Is to be a suppiement fo respond to the concems raised at DRCOG. Your community has besn asked tn participate in the meeting because you are considered an "affected city or cnunty." We encourage your participation by your attendance or by sending a represenYative. If you believe that you have interests impacted by the Jefferson County segment, ws also encourage you to contact the Jefferson County Commissioners. If you have further suggestions plaase contact Kirk Oglesby (438-6300), Projects Administrator, at the City of Broomfield. Attached are the foilowing ifems to help you prepare for meefing. 1. Draft Agenda . 2. The TIP conditions Please note that a majority vote of affected parties is needed for a decision on the scope. Atthough DRCOG has not actually defined which governments ere considered afFocted parties, the DRCOG staff hes suggested we mail this nofice to the parties listed. • ~ w° ZS'T cc: Larry Wamer, p' ctor, CpOT Region 6 Steve Hogan, tlve Qirecior, E-470 Authority 0- Cal Marseila, e~~ ~ManaAer, RTD~, ~ c:+makw/~Pe 30 ~ ✓ l~~" ' d4 ~ AUG-2i-9i 12:01 Frem:CiiY 0F 3,i0CMFIclO UGd./ A7T,yy. 3C3eo°ii: i-311 P.O;/04 Jch-34i Condifions of Approval from DRCOG Resolution to Adopt the 1987 - 2002 Transportation lmproverrment Program and Find Conformity with the Sfate Implementation Plan forAir Quality: BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that funding for the SH-93/Northwest ` ' Parkway Feasibility Stwdy (97-027) is programmed in federa! FY 1999 = (beginning October 1,.1998) and, consequently, the project must be reconfirmed in the 1999-2004 TIP. This situation provides sufficienf time for the affected cifies and counties to establish a mechanism for addressing their respective issues about the project. Prior to Board adoption of the 1999-2004 TIP, the parties are asked 1) to establish by majority an agreemant defining the structure and organization for carrying ' out the feasibility study and 2) to prepare a scops of work for the study. The board wiil use the agreement and scope of work as a basis for including study funding in the 1999-2004 TIP. The Transporfation Committee and Soard may reconfirm the project without an agreement in place. c%City-chAtlpcondCoc AUG-2i-9T 12:00 Fron:CiiY OF crtOCMFIELO MGR./ ATTAY. 3034a'33ii4 T-311 P.03104 Joh-9;i NORTHWEST PARKWAY FEASlBIUTY STUDY DRAFTAGENDA SEPTEMSER 3, 1997 BROOMFIELD CITY HALL 1. Overview of Past Meetings and Process - Mayor Berens if. Structuro anci Organization 111. Scope of Feasibility Study IV. Next Meeting V. - Adjournment c;1nwPkwyte3aod.doc f RESOLUTION NO. lSq7 Series of 1997 TITLE: A RESOLUTION OF THE WHEAT.RIDGE CITY COUNCIL EXPRESSING ITS POLICY TOWARDS TRANSPORTATION SYSTEMS IN THE NORTHWEST QUADRANT OF THE DENVER METROPOLZTAN_AREA WHEREAS, the City of Wheat Ridge is a mature community __._.served,_,or affected by several significant. Federal and State - - highways; and wHEREAS, given Wheat Ridge's unique geographic.location in the metropolitan area, the transportation impacts of growth and development in the Denver metropolitan area, and in particular, in the Northwest Quadrant, will impact upon the quality of life of Wheat Ridge residents; and WHEREAS, only through quality transportation system planning can some of the impacts of growth and development be mitigated for the Wheat'Ridge community; NOW,.THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Wheat Ridge that: Section 1. A policy of improving parallel north/south corridors in the`Northwest Quadrant of the Denver metropolitan area is hereby supported. This approach would equally disperse existing traffic and congestion and that resulting from growth and development. Section 2. In furtherance of the north/south parallel corridor-development, a high priority on the construction of.the following improvements is supported: a. Full traffic movement at the Colorado State Highway '58 and I-70 interchange. . b. Improvement of the Ward Road and I-70 interchange. c. Improvement of the Kipling Street and I-70 interchange. d.' Improvements to the Wadsworth corridor to facilitate the adequate Plow of traffic without the necessity for additional through lanes in the City of Wheat Ridge. Section 3. In the development of parallel north/south corridors in the Northwest Quadrant, improvements should be made which specifically recognize the impacts of said improvements on af£ected neighborhoods so that impacts are mitigated and the quality of life in said neighborhoods is protected. • Section 4. In the development of transportation system improvements in the Northwest quadrant, improvements should provide: a. Protection of the Clear Creek Watershed and any - - - impacf at municipal water Pacilities. b. Protection of the Standley Lake Watershed. c. Protection of mountain backdrops. d. Protection of open space and wildli£e habitat. Section 5. The Wheat Ridge City Council specifically finds that plans to develop Highway 93 into a high speed limited access freeway are hereby inconsistent with its policy of parallel north/south corridors designed to more sensitively disperse traffic and congestion and also with its policy of respecting neighborhoods and their quality of li£e. Section 6. In the development of transportation systems, addressing existing deficiencies and roadways should have priority over new roadways that might.promote urban sprawl. ' Section 7. A policy of supporting traffic congestion management options and alternate modes o£ transit is supported in order to reduce the reliance on new road construction or road improvements. DONE AND RESOLVED this ZSth day of Apri1 , 1997. , . Dan Wilde, Mayor ATTEST: , . / ~ Wanda Sang, City Cj k J - RESOLUTION NO. 816 A RESOLUTION OF THE GOLDEN CITY COiJNCIL ESTABLISffiNG ITS POLICY TOWARDS TRA,`ISPORTATION IMPROVEMEN'I'S IN THE NORTMVEST QUADRANT OF THE DENVER METI20POLTTAI`I AREA : WFEREAS, the City of Goldcq one of the oldat and mostuniquc ci[ics in thc mctropolitan uca, finds its fuhirc thrcatrncd by a planncd new frceway through iLs vallcy; and - WFEREAS, the City of Goldcn and iis ncigtiboring commimitics cnjoy a spccial ]ifcstylo and a uniquc gcograptucal scuing that can bc dwactaicd by highway noisc aad air pollution; and WI-IEREAS, scvaal paztia arc vigorously advocating coashucrion of a fruway imda the trim Northwcst Parkway which would cvmtvally cany in cxttss of 100,000 vchiclcs pcr day through ihis city, and WHg2EAS, 95 % of the irsidmccs affaicd by this fiuway would bc wiihin ibc City of Goldcss, which is alrcady dividcd by too many major hi8hways: and WIi&RFj4S, the Goldca City Cama1 hat bcro shxlying this izsucbaaasc it ncognizu thaL this frccway is a scrioas thicai to the quality of lifc and cconomic scamty of ics cirizcas. THEREFORE, BE TT RESOLVED BY TfE CITY COUNCIL OF I'FE CITY OF GOLDEN, COLORADO: • . Soction I AnY ncw fi=waY, Pmkw8Y. «beltwsY conshixrion tbrough Goldca tvcst of the Tablc Moimtaias will requuz slatc of the aR h-anspodabon scdu¢xhuc and potcntially axpensivc wastuction W avoid destroY'ng the 4ualitY of lifc cajoycd bS' Goldca's cifiiras. 5r~4iL2. As ncw dcvclopmcnt occvrs along the FEghway 93 corridor, the dcvdopcr and 8ovuning jansdidioa5 mast cffccrivcly mitigatc noisc and haffic impacu on all «isting nughborhoods and aro,,•,' irspomzbility for the ibstallation of nxasary hanspoctation improvcmcats to cany the majority ofncw traffic m the cast of the Tablc Moumiains. • t . . i . Scction 3. Thc City Council finds that a morc appmpriatc appcoach' fot trauspoctation improvcmcncs in the northwcst quadrant xrould bc dcvdopmwt of pazalld comdor improvcmmts to sprcad haffic inutascs among uvual corridocs including, but not limitcd to: A. Wadsworth Boulcvard B. Kipling S4cct C. Ward Road • D. Indiana/McIntyre , • E. Shu-idan Boulcvard . ' F. Statc Highway 58 at I-70 ' ' G. I-25, I-76, I-70; and ' H. U.S. Highway 36 . Scction 4• Thc City Camcil finds that traasportation improvcments must includc a sa-ious study 4.2197 Reso3utioqNo:BI 6 =-Page:?; of mass p-ansi[ from all communities in this quadranL Sccnon 5. AIIy and all hiShwaY imProvcmcats tfiat arc madc must bc spccifically daigncd to not on1S' mitigate the impact of ncw coastruction, bu[ to improvc cucicnt conditiqns for such cnvuonmcntal factors as: A. Noise impacts on all neighborhoods; B. Protcchon of qualiry of lifc, •Frcc acccssbciwcm ncighborhoods separated b highways; D. Pro[cction of Clcar Crec}c and Goldcn's municipal watcr facility; E. Protxtion of tfic Standlcy Lakc watcrshcc, F. Protuhon ofthcmountain backdrop; and G. Prota;Yion of opca spacro and wildlifc. Scction 6. Thc City Council mcouraga thc Colocado Dcpartnmt of Traaiportation to continuc its safdy and cuvironmmfal mhancemmLs aiong I-l'ighway 6 and Fi'ighway 93 to includc: . A. Shoulda improvcmcnts; . B. Additional pasting lana; C. Bridgc npiaumcnts; D. , Spccd reducbons, including an cffccIIVC dcsign spccd through Goldca of 45 milcs pci hour or Icss; and E. Erfcnsivc noisc miUgation thcough Goldm and otbu ccsidcaUal attas. ,S.och4iLZ. Thc Goldcu City Councii is tcquating suppcxt for thcsc principlct fiom thc Jcff=son County Board of County Cort,,,,;<.;onas and otha city councls, and ncighborhood usociations within thc no[thwcst quadranL Adoptcd thc 28th day of April, 1497. A Susan M. Brcantie, CMC/AAE Jimes A. Vu Ciry Attorney ; . i . ~ an C. Scbcnck Mayor ( 4,31.97 Northwest Parlcway Summit Work Session Meeting Minutes Apri130, 1997 The first orgaziizational meeting between Jefferson County, cities within Jefferson County, Colorado Department of Transportation, Northwest Metro Chamber and Denver Regional ` Council of Govemments was held on Wednesday, April 30, 1997, from 6 p.in. to 9 p.m. The purpose.of4he meeting was to discuss each community's and agency's concerns and discuss a process for obtaining the federal funding for the "NOrthwest Pazkway Feasibility Study." Eacn community/agency provided input on tiieir issues/concerns to de addressed in the feasibility study. These commenls are summarized below. In additior, position papers were also provided by Golden, Wheat Ridge and Wesiminster and aze attached. Two common concems/suggestions that were expressed by the communities and agencies are: i) The feasibility study should be able to address each community's concems, and 2) The feasibility study should recognize the "transportation system" and include other north- south corridors, incompletelmissing interchanges and other transportation modes. Specific elements the cities and the Boazd of County Commissioners would like to see addressed in a feasibility study include: Arvada • Be creative in problem solving • Don't draw lines in sand now Study should address issues for/of each city - attempt fo address • Shou(d attempt to preserve adequate ROW for future internoda( corridors Broomfield • Each city's interests should be addressed • Should promote intermodal opportunities • Should promote air quality • Should promote buffering between cities Golden (See Resolution)- • Preserve quality of life as much as possible : • Should utilize "state of Yhe art" techniques • L,ook at all altematives • Consider tunneling - Seriously • Consider other broad impacts of traffic generating actions (such as Alameda Interchange at C- 470) • Keep potentials alive for reduced speeds • Keep broad traffic in mind - not just this comdor Lakewood • Strive for "united position" so Lakewood does not have to choose between competing interests of other cities with more pressing concems • Concern that Northwest Pazkway will divert funds from higher priorities such as Wadsworth - identified as #1 priority of countywide plan Wheat Ridee (See Resolution) • Should address north/south comdors - not just Northwest Pazkway • Golden's concerns must be taken seriously Westminster (See Position Paper) • Northwest Parkway should be closer aligned to Westminster on the east side of Rocky Flats • Should be a high speed, limited access roadway • State/Federal money should fund - CDOT shou(d manage project • Should protect Standley Lake's water • Look at other north/south needs/opportunities Board of Countv Commissioners • Look at potential alignmen[s to minimize impacu on existing development (Pat Holloway) (Get out in front of Dev.) • Link with/utilize open space as much as possible (John StoneJPat Holloway) • Look hard at 58th/I-70 Interchange (John Stone/NLchelle Lawrence) • Alignments should utilize/foster buffering - protect open space (Mchelle Lawrence) • Must protect water (Mchelle Lawrence) "Action Ifems/Schedule:°' - • Mazch 1998 for product delivery to DRCOG on a more defined definition of scope-of-work. • One elected official from each entity to come together as sieering committee to help identify the scope-of-work for the feasibility study. A technical commitiee will also be established to assist the steering committee and consist of staff from each entity and CDOT. • Meeting # 1 to be coordinated as soon as possible. • Each entity to solicit public input and fonvazd to steering committee. Meeting Adjourned. NN/bsg Attachmenis: Agenda DRCOG Resolution April 30, 1997 Weicome and Introducfions Meeting Purpose, Ground Rules and Objecfives Background of Beltway Comdor Concept 8ackground of W-470 inter-ChamberTask Force Background ' and Update , DRCOG Transportation Improvement Program (T1P) . Funding Process and Timeline CDOT Perspective and Potenfial Role in Feasibility Study Discussion of Elemenfs Cities Would Like to See Addressed in Feasibility Study Where Do We Go From Here? John P. Stone, Chairman Jefferson County Commission Michelle Lawrence, Chairman Pro-tem Jefferson County Commission DRCOG Board Memb'er Zeke Zebauers, Director Highways and Transportation :lefferson County Tim Heaton, Chair Inter-Chamber Task Force Luanne Williams Northwest Metro Chamber George Scheuemstuhl, DRCOG Flodie Anderson, Colorado Transportation Commissioner Representatives of: Anrada Broomfieid Goiden Lakewood 1iVestminster Wheat Ridge Michelle Lawrence ~ L Q ~ E ~ L -C v-- a) ~ (n . 0 m ~ ' 0 !n u) ~ . a) ~ Q. U V. Q . . E p E . ~ . a ~ ~ ~ C: cu C) I- ~ O ~ ~ ~ t p ' ^ ~/J Z ~ a) ' U) 'U) ' ~ L . . (Y) (D N ...Q Q co Q. LL a) U E (D a) ~ Q a) 'Z3 U (o a U) a) • cu L a) 11' O , - N O J- ~ . E V ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ E r~-~ > C p C 1-- E O (u -Q ~ . ~ L2. (Lf ~ 0- ~ LI., (D ~ ~ :3 u ~ O 'a tn W W . ~ U) -t > ~ C ~ -C U > et' 2 O N ~ 4-- Q U O O , ~ N Of W ~ ~ - Q CY) 0 0-) (U j CD Z ~ I- L L- rn ~ . W > l z3 (c) ~ a Q ' L a~ Q) I--- cl) . ~ (Y 4 O L Q C) C: N (1) O ~ ' f~ ~ ~ O-) !F Z3 O C!~ Ll._ 0 ~ cn (iS (Lf ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ U D N ~ ~ CU . 0) -o ~ 4= . ~ _ 70 U) D U) L L ~ O = 0 0). ~ :'.4- L Q ~ ~ - . 1E U ~ . ~ ~ L O U cn cn O a) (U N ch t~ C L (D (II Q ~ o 1-- r' N t 0 4- U) U) CTJ -0 (6 U) (6 .SC L ~ ~ 0 (1) Q O U U) "C3 ~ ~ F- ~ ~ O Q~ ~ 0)0) ~ ~ ~ C C cu ~ 04- m a O U) C~ zs f- N O O N n m ~ ~ N .L-. - cu d ~ 0 QQ O L O c o c ~ O ~ N p~ O er ~ . O Q7 • U ~ 'cr 0 ~ ~ c ~ -Fq Eco (D ~ 3 o U € ~ :3,2 0 U o z U c .n . •-:o~ ~ On Ll. ; (D ~ cc > E c CU m O 0 [L o E r- ~ a~ > o U ~ aZ N C - ` t6 C ~ 0 U- 0 o a~i ~ n~ m ~ n FL-f~Q CITX POSITION ON NORTHWEST PARKWAY Westrninster's position on the proposed Northwest Parkway consists of the followina components: o The parkway or beltway shall be aligned on the east side of the Rocky Flats _ _ . ~ property. ' o 'Ilie improvements would be limited acccss, high speed, xid wculd need tu meet highway standazds. o 'Ihe project is to be funded by State and/or Federal funds, but not locat funds. o Appropriate physical barriers would be required as part of the project to protxt the wafer quality in Standley Lalce. • a The IOOth Avenue Intenchange with thc outcrbelt 5xvrdy would bc a - prerequisite io assarc access for Westrninstcr area motorists. o Dcvelopmeat of Indiana Street, MacIntyic Sheci, and Wani Road arc to ocaur • simultaneoas(y with the Northwest Parkway to providc nxded altcmativc north-south routes. o Thc City supports and will participafe in the Feasibility Study listed in the Fivo Year Transpoctation Improvanent Plan (M). • , _ . • , . . _ ' 1 . . . • . . , " 1 . - . . . . " ' ~ C c t~r ~o by ~ ~