Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Project Prioritization topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Staff added environmental criterion to ranking used to pick fuel‑grant projects
Summary
Staff described a three-step selection process that yielded 16 candidate projects; they ranked candidates using the city's existing criteria and added an environmental‑benefit criterion required by the grant to ensure responsiveness to mitigation goals.
Sean Hayes described a three-step selection process used after the city was notified it would receive fuel-impact funding: staff reviewed hazardous‑materials corridors using aerial and driving reviews, compiled candidate projects (16 total), and applied a prioritization matrix to score and rank projects.
"There was 1 new criteria that we developed specifically for the grant. That's that 1 in green, the environmental benefit," Hayes said. He told the council the other ranking items matched the city's connecting Aurora criteria and that environmental considerations were explicitly added to respond to grant requirements.
The ranking identified two projects — Tower & Smith and Airport & Smith — as the highest scoring; staff said the two scored noticeably higher than other candidates and the city aims to advance them into design with the grant funds.
