Print
E-mail
Comment
County moves forward with transportation regulations
County officials are moving ahead with regulations that played a part in a battle with Colorado's highway agency last year.
By By: Kiersten J. Mayer
County officials are moving ahead with regulations that played a part in a battle with Colorado's highway agency last year.
Douglas County and Colorado Department of Transportation officials have been battling over county 1041 State Matters of Interest regulations that require the highway agency to apply for permits for highway projects in Douglas County. CDOT sued the county over the requirement but lost in a September 2006 ruling by Douglas County District Court Judge Charles M. Pratt.
The attorney general's office, representing CDOT in the court fight with Douglas County, is challenging that ruling in the Colorado Court of Appeals. County officials continue to move along with amendments to 1041 regulations on transportation.
County officials have said their intent with the 1041 regulations is to ensure a place at the table on CDOT projects that impact local residents, the motivating example being proposed express toll lanes on a 12-mile section of C-470.
They have, however, extended an olive branch.
The regulation regarding new, unplanned general purpose highway lanes will be removed, said Lance Ingalls, Douglas County attorney.
"As they are written now, the county 1041 regulations cause CDOT to apply for a permit for general purpose lanes," he said last fall.
The proposed 1041 amendments modify the definition so Douglas County officials recognize that existing interchange projects and addition of general purpose lanes that are planned are covered, and they don't have to get a separate 1041 permit, said Douglas County Commissioner Steve Boand.
Douglas County's 1041 regulations affect a number of areas that CDOT oversees, including toll lanes, interchanges, new highways and major expansions of current highways.
One concern Douglas County officials have heard from CDOT is over the county's authority to oversee any state project.
When asked more specifically, CDOT officials expressed a specific concern about permit requirements for general purpose lanes not already planned.
"We hope the removal of the requirement of a permit for general purpose lanes helps the relationship with CDOT, but they are still required to get a 1041 permit for other projects, including those with toll lanes, new highways and new interchanges," Ingalls said.
There is a 35-day period for referral comments on the proposed amendment to Douglas County's 1041 regulations and a 30-day public notice period before there will be a public hearing, he said.
CDOT officials have not commented on the amendment to remove permit requirements for general purpose lanes, he said.
In March, the proposed revised 1041 regulations were sent to CDOT for referral comments, but the state highway agency has not given any official response, he said.
Ingalls said when he asked if the normal referral process should move forward to the changes to a conclusion, the Douglas Board of County Commissioners said "yes."
"CDOT has had time to comment, and we will continue with the rest of standard referral process for an amendment to 1041 regulations," he said.
That includes sending the proposed amendments to other possibly interested parties and organizations, publication of notice and a public hearing in front of the Douglas Board of County Commissioners, he said.
"Sending the proposed amendments to CDOT was all about bridge building, to the commissioners, to see if the state highway agency wanted to engage in a different manner," he said.
Attorneys with the state attorney general's office filed a reply brief June 25 in the Colorado Court of Appeals that still maintains Douglas County's 1041 regulations do not apply to CDOT in its exercise of statewide transportation and planning projects, said Stacey Stegman, spokeswoman for CDOT.
After filing the brief, the court will schedule oral arguments in the next few months and then Douglas County and CDOT will get a written ruling, she said.
If CDOT officials want to add a general purpose lane that hasn't already been planned, they would have to get a 1041 permit, said Boand.
And that includes C-470, which has already been designed for three general purpose lanes in either direction.
A toll lane project, on the other hand, would require a Douglas County 1041 permit because it's a different configuration for toll booths, moving traffic from toll lanes back to general purpose lanes and also to interchanges, he said.
"Our primary concern is safety," said Boand. "We haven't seen a plan for the express toll lanes that address those concerns. Construction of general purpose lanes would be totally fine."
Talk of express toll lanes on C-470 by CDOT's administration started the court fight. Douglas County officials also expressed concerns over the financial plan for the proposed tollway.
"We didn't think it was financially feasible," he said. "Those issues still stand."
Boand said he expects CDOT to appeal the case beyond the Court of Appeals if the district court ruling stands.
An analysis of an environmental assessment of CDOT's proposed express toll lanes on C-470 by a Douglas County consultant supplied ammunition for local agencies.
Express toll lanes on C-470 between Kipling Parkway and Interstate 25 would increase congestion, be less safe and fail to pay for themselves as promised, Norman Marshall, president of Smart Mobility Inc. of Norwich, Vt., said in March 2006
Express toll lanes are the preferred CDOT solution for anticipated traffic increases for the 12.5-mile stretch of C-470. Smart Mobility's analysis shows a lack of ramps would cause inefficiency, that toll lane traffic would have to cross free lanes to get to off-ramps and there would be insufficient buffers between pay and free lanes in some sections.
A less expensive alternative would be adding two free lanes in both directions, costing $25 million to $50 million, Marshall said. CDOT is estimating its toll lane proposal would cost $325 million, which also does not include interchange improvements at Santa Fe Drive.
Inflated traffic projections that went beyond the toll lane's capacity were used in the CDOT environmental assessment to illustrate that 80 percent of the project would be paid for by tolls, he said.
Contact Kiersten J. Mayer at 303-663-7174 or kmayer@ccnewspapers.com.
Douglas County and Colorado Department of Transportation officials have been battling over county 1041 State Matters of Interest regulations that require the highway agency to apply for permits for highway projects in Douglas County. CDOT sued the county over the requirement but lost in a September 2006 ruling by Douglas County District Court Judge Charles M. Pratt.
The attorney general's office, representing CDOT in the court fight with Douglas County, is challenging that ruling in the Colorado Court of Appeals. County officials continue to move along with amendments to 1041 regulations on transportation.
County officials have said their intent with the 1041 regulations is to ensure a place at the table on CDOT projects that impact local residents, the motivating example being proposed express toll lanes on a 12-mile section of C-470.
They have, however, extended an olive branch.
The regulation regarding new, unplanned general purpose highway lanes will be removed, said Lance Ingalls, Douglas County attorney.
"As they are written now, the county 1041 regulations cause CDOT to apply for a permit for general purpose lanes," he said last fall.
The proposed 1041 amendments modify the definition so Douglas County officials recognize that existing interchange projects and addition of general purpose lanes that are planned are covered, and they don't have to get a separate 1041 permit, said Douglas County Commissioner Steve Boand.
Douglas County's 1041 regulations affect a number of areas that CDOT oversees, including toll lanes, interchanges, new highways and major expansions of current highways.
One concern Douglas County officials have heard from CDOT is over the county's authority to oversee any state project.
When asked more specifically, CDOT officials expressed a specific concern about permit requirements for general purpose lanes not already planned.
"We hope the removal of the requirement of a permit for general purpose lanes helps the relationship with CDOT, but they are still required to get a 1041 permit for other projects, including those with toll lanes, new highways and new interchanges," Ingalls said.
There is a 35-day period for referral comments on the proposed amendment to Douglas County's 1041 regulations and a 30-day public notice period before there will be a public hearing, he said.
CDOT officials have not commented on the amendment to remove permit requirements for general purpose lanes, he said.
In March, the proposed revised 1041 regulations were sent to CDOT for referral comments, but the state highway agency has not given any official response, he said.
Ingalls said when he asked if the normal referral process should move forward to the changes to a conclusion, the Douglas Board of County Commissioners said "yes."
"CDOT has had time to comment, and we will continue with the rest of standard referral process for an amendment to 1041 regulations," he said.
That includes sending the proposed amendments to other possibly interested parties and organizations, publication of notice and a public hearing in front of the Douglas Board of County Commissioners, he said.
"Sending the proposed amendments to CDOT was all about bridge building, to the commissioners, to see if the state highway agency wanted to engage in a different manner," he said.
Attorneys with the state attorney general's office filed a reply brief June 25 in the Colorado Court of Appeals that still maintains Douglas County's 1041 regulations do not apply to CDOT in its exercise of statewide transportation and planning projects, said Stacey Stegman, spokeswoman for CDOT.
After filing the brief, the court will schedule oral arguments in the next few months and then Douglas County and CDOT will get a written ruling, she said.
If CDOT officials want to add a general purpose lane that hasn't already been planned, they would have to get a 1041 permit, said Boand.
And that includes C-470, which has already been designed for three general purpose lanes in either direction.
A toll lane project, on the other hand, would require a Douglas County 1041 permit because it's a different configuration for toll booths, moving traffic from toll lanes back to general purpose lanes and also to interchanges, he said.
"Our primary concern is safety," said Boand. "We haven't seen a plan for the express toll lanes that address those concerns. Construction of general purpose lanes would be totally fine."
Talk of express toll lanes on C-470 by CDOT's administration started the court fight. Douglas County officials also expressed concerns over the financial plan for the proposed tollway.
"We didn't think it was financially feasible," he said. "Those issues still stand."
Boand said he expects CDOT to appeal the case beyond the Court of Appeals if the district court ruling stands.
An analysis of an environmental assessment of CDOT's proposed express toll lanes on C-470 by a Douglas County consultant supplied ammunition for local agencies.
Express toll lanes on C-470 between Kipling Parkway and Interstate 25 would increase congestion, be less safe and fail to pay for themselves as promised, Norman Marshall, president of Smart Mobility Inc. of Norwich, Vt., said in March 2006
Express toll lanes are the preferred CDOT solution for anticipated traffic increases for the 12.5-mile stretch of C-470. Smart Mobility's analysis shows a lack of ramps would cause inefficiency, that toll lane traffic would have to cross free lanes to get to off-ramps and there would be insufficient buffers between pay and free lanes in some sections.
A less expensive alternative would be adding two free lanes in both directions, costing $25 million to $50 million, Marshall said. CDOT is estimating its toll lane proposal would cost $325 million, which also does not include interchange improvements at Santa Fe Drive.
Inflated traffic projections that went beyond the toll lane's capacity were used in the CDOT environmental assessment to illustrate that 80 percent of the project would be paid for by tolls, he said.
Contact Kiersten J. Mayer at 303-663-7174 or kmayer@ccnewspapers.com.
Submit a Comment
|
You must be logged in to post a comment.
|
Not yet a registered member?
Click here to become one. |
