Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Transportation Floyd Hill topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Clear Creek commissioners approve Floyd Hill CDOT permit with changes, continue technical reporting
Summary
The Clear Creek County Board of County Commissioners on May 20 approved Resolution 25-47, granting Areas and Activities of State Interest status for CDOTFloyd Hill project, subject to staff direction to incorporate edits from prior hearings and additional clarifications.
The Clear Creek County Board of County Commissioners on May 20 approved Resolution 25-47, granting Areas and Activities of State Interest status for the Colorado Department of Transportation(CDOT) Floyd Hill project, subject to further edits and staff direction to incorporate changes discussed at the May 6 hearing and during the May 20 continuation.
The boardapproved the resolution after receiving a staff summary of edits CDOT had agreed to and hearing from CDOT project officials and local stakeholders. The permit covers completion of a six-lane highway component from Floyd Hill through the Veterans Memorial Tunnels, construction of the Greenway Trail and a frontage road from Idaho Springs to the U.S. Highway 6 interchange, and an auxiliary lane on the uphill section of Floyd Hill, plus modifications to the US 6 and Hidden Valley interchanges.
County staff said the packet before commissioners contained a clean version of the permit that incorporates many of the changes discussed at prior meetings, and that a redline would be provided for public review. Staff highlighted clarifications to the findings of fact and standard/additional criteria, adjustments to language about toll lanes, and edits to conditions referencing noise monitoring and required reporting.
Kurt Kianka, CDOT Floyd Hill project director, told the board, "I feel very comfortable that we can do that, and can meet all of the requirements spelled out in here." Abby Manafri, CDOT NEPA manager for the I-70 corridor, said the changes "make sense to us" and that CDOT and the county would work together on reporting and next steps.
Local watershed volunteers urged more specific local participation in water-quality monitoring. Anne Sorensen, who said she represents the Upper Clear Creek Watershed Association at technical-team meetings, asked that the permit require CDOT to work with "stakeholder agencies" in addition to state agencies and county staff and recommended the county include ongoing local monitoring reports such as annual Third Creek monitoring data when setting baseline comparisons.
County staff and CDOT agreed to coordinate distribution of monitoring results, with CDOT confirming it would continue ongoing particulate monitoring and work with the county on data sharing. Commissioners discussed clarifying language so that the county would receive reports and be able to disseminate them to stakeholders as requested.
After discussion, a commissioner moved to approve Resolution 25-47 as presented, "subject to staff being directed to ensure that the final version incorporates changes from May 6 hearing and its continuation today" and to include any scrivener corrections. The motion passed by voice vote.
The board also continued, to May 27, a separate CDOT hearing (the 10401/COLORADO Transportation Investment Office matter) that had been opened earlier the same day; CDOT will appear at the May 27 meeting to present that permit application.
The final resolution and its attachments will be finalized by county staff to reflect the edits discussed at the May 6 and May 20 sessions and will be posted when complete.
