Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Land Use topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Golden‑area residents raise contamination and traffic concerns over 5950 McIntyre site development
Summary
Residents told Jefferson County commissioners during the Oct. 14 public comment period they are concerned about missing documents, potential brownfield contamination, inadequate traffic analysis and the proposed scale of buildings at the 5950 McIntyre (Golden Technology Center) application.
Residents near the proposed 5950 McIntyre development told the Jefferson County Board of County Commissioners on Oct. 14 they are seeking better public information, more testing for soil contamination, and stricter limits on building size and setbacks for a project marketed as a logistics/distribution center and light industrial campus.
Anne Lafoon and Julie Hogan addressed the board during public comment. Lafoon said some documents referenced in the county portal were not readily accessible to the public and asked county staff to ensure all materials are posted and easy to find. She also said settlement discussions with the developer have been ongoing for three years and that residents want concessions, including a larger setback for the northernmost building consistent with a 300‑foot setback used in other developments. Lafoon said a borrow pit area is outside the current voluntary cleanup area and is not covered by a no‑action determination letter; she asked for updated heavy‑metal testing and remediation using current standards and equipment.
Julie Hogan, who identified herself as a West Arvada resident, said the applicant’s marketing presents the campus for a range of uses — from logistics distribution to research labs and light manufacturing — yet the county’s accepted transportation study treats the site as warehousing. Hogan said two independent transportation engineers retained by residents concluded the county’s traffic estimates are too low by about 2,000 daily trips (the application’s estimate of about 300 truck trips could be 800 or more, per the residents’ consultants). Hogan urged the county to require smaller building footprints and lower heights to better accommodate light industrial or office uses and to reduce truck bays if the development shifts away from high-intensity logistics.
County staff (the clerk noted that County Manager Joe Kirby was present and would follow up) acknowledged receipt of the comments and said staff would follow up with the residents. The board did not take action on this matter at the meeting; commissioners were not recorded voting on modifications to the project during this session.
The residents’ concerns include environmental testing and remediation, public access to application materials, traffic assumptions and design choices that affect nearby residential compatibility. The applicants and planning staff will continue review through the county’s planning processes, which include additional public input opportunities at later stages such as plat and site plan review.
