PUBLIC INVOLVEMENT AND AGENCY COORDINATION 6 Avenue Parkway Extension .
APPENDIX BPUBLIC INVOLVEMENT AND AGENCYCOORDINATIONFOR THE6th Avenue Parkway ExtensionEnvironmental AssessmentCOLORADO DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATIONFEDERAL HIGHWAY ADMINISTRATIONJune 2016
6th Avenue Parkway Extension EAAppendix B – Agency and Stakeholder CoordinationThe environmental assessment process included a comprehensive public and agency involvementprogram, which complemented the technical studies and analyses conducted by the project team. Publicinvolvement included general public meetings, one-on-one meetings with property owners, webpageinformation, and a range of opportunities to comment through email, phone, and written comments.Public and agency has included the following meetings and outreach: Public Open Houses – Invitations to the public open houses were advertised by: City of Auroraproject website announcement, added to the City of Aurora’s calendar of events/meetings,mailed letters directly to known impacted both direct and indirect community members, emailblast, newspaper advertisement, and flyers to individual households within a determined area.Invited stakeholders included the general public, community, agency, and municipalrepresentatives. At the first public meeting held on December 3, 2014, the project teampresented and solicited input on the initial six alignments and solicited input from the public onany other alternatives. The second meeting held March 18, 2015 presented four alignments andsolicited input from the public on their preference of alignments. Project Management Team (PMT) meetings held monthly beginning in September 2014 withCity of Aurora. The PMT consists of key City of Aurora staff involved in the decision making forthe project. During PMT meetings, alternative alignments were discussed in specific detail. Inputwas solicited from each PMT member to obtain information on screening criteria, alternativecomponents, and specific concerns. These items were then included in the alternativedevelopment and screening process. Technical Working Group (TWG) meetings held monthly beginning in September 2014 with Cityof Aurora, Arapahoe County, CDOT, Federal Highway Administration (FHWA), Buckley Air ForceBase (AFB), Urban Drainage and Flood Control District (UDFCD), and E-470. The TWG consists ofkey stakeholders and agencies with interest in the project. TWG members provided specificinput on alternative screening criteria and alternative alignments. Recommendations andconcerns from TWG members were included in the ultimate refinement and selection of theProposed Action. Numerous additional coordination meetings were held with City of Aurora Parks Recreation andOpen Space (PROS) Department, Arapahoe County Open Space Department, Great OutdoorsColorado (GOCO), as well as other City and County staff. Discussions with these groups centeredaround avoidance, minimization, and mitigation of impacts to parks, recreation, and open spaceresources resulting from the Proposed Action. Input from these groups was considered carefullyin the screening and ultimate selection of the Proposed Action. Additional coordination meetings between CDOT, FHWA and the City of Aurora.Input received from the public and stakeholders was thoroughly reviewed and taken into considerationduring the alternatives development and screening process, and in the assessment of impact anddevelopment of mitigation measures.Page B-1
6th Avenue Parkway Extension EAAppendix B – Agency and Stakeholder CoordinationThis appendix includes summary information from public meeting and a list of agency and publicinvolvement activities as follows:INDEX OF PUBLIC INVOLVEMENT AND AGENCY COORDINATION ACTIVITIESINFORMATION INCLUDED IN APPENDIX BDateCorrespondence/ActivityPageDecember 3, 2014Flyer for First Public Open House MeetingB-3December 3, 2014Open House Meeting #1 Re-capB-4March 18, 2015Flyer for Second Public Open House MeetingB-7March 18, 2015Open House Meeting #2 Re-capB-8July 7, 2015CDOT APE Consultation LetterB-12July 14, 2015APE Consultation Letter from State Historic Preservation OfficerB-15October 28, 2015Resource Agency Coordination Meeting LetterB-16December 11, 2015Determination of Eligibility and Effects Concurrence LetterB-18January 11, 2016Section 106 Native American ConsultationB-19February 10, 2016Section 106 Consultation Response: Comanche NationB-24January 26, 2016CDOT Eligibility and Effects Determinations for ArchaeologicalResourcesB-25January 29, 2016SHPO Eligibility and Effects Determinations for ArchaeologicalResourcesB-26February 23, 2016Section 106 Determinations of Eligibility and EffectsB-27February 23, 2016Northern Cheyenne Tribe ResponseB-28June 7, 2016Preble’s Meadow Jumping Mouse and Ute Ladies’-tresses OrchidLetter from United States Department of the InteriorB-292014 – 2016List of Agency and Public Involvement ActivitiesB-32Page B-2
Page B-3
December 3, 2014 Open House Re-capOverviewThe 6th Avenue Parkway Extension project in the City of Aurora, being documented as anEnvironmental Assessment (EA), is intended to explain the need for the proposed project, thealternatives considered, the anticipated environmental benefits, impacts, and mitigation ofalternatives, and identifies the selected alternative for implementation.In support of the EA process, the Project Team held an Open House on December 3, 2014 tosolicit comments from the public and local agencies during the review period.The Open House was held at the Beck Recreation Center for the surrounding community to learnmore about the 6th Avenue Parkway Extension project, interact with the Project Team and provideinput on the preliminary alignments. The proposed extension will close a critical gap in the regionaltransportation network to enhance east-west mobility between 6th Avenue/State Highway 30 andE-470, and address increased traveldemand from new residential andbusiness growth in the area.Station DescriptionThe Open House consisted of severaldifferent informational stations staffedby the City and Project Team membersincluding: Project Overview – A high levelintroduction to the projectpurpose and need, projecthistory, the alternativesscreening process andconsiderations, and existingtraffic analysis.Alternatives Overview – Mapsof the six current alternativesunder consideration in the studyarea with basic pros and cons ofeach.Screening CriteriaPrioritization – All Open Houseattendees were asked toparticipate in this interactivesticky dot activity by taking fourdots and plotting them in orderof priority next to their preferredcriteria. This station also included one comprehensive map of all six alternatives togetherto provide broader context. See image to the above-right for results.Next Steps – An outline of remaining project milestones and project deliverables.Page B-4
Public Comment – Input from the surrounding community is considered a very importantaspect to this transportation planning process and each Open House attendee wasencouraged to complete a public comment form. Community members were also able tocomplete the form after the Open House and submit for review either by mail or online.InputApproximately 45 community members attended the December 3rd Open House between thehours of 6 to 8 p.m. Those in attendance represented a diverse geographical sample of residentsin the public process study area. Of those 45, nearly 60% completed a public comment form.The following two screening criteria were considered to be most important to attendees:1) Improve transportation operations and mobility2) Avoid, minimize, and mitigate environmental impacts – specifically those to thesurrounding open space and parksIn support of the project purpose and need, community members were asked to provide theirprimary interest in connecting the gap between SH 30 and E-470 and the top two answers were:1) Reduce travel time2) Reduce congestion to address existing/future demandAttendees were given the opportunity to provide feedback on the six proposed alignments todate; the following summarizes the results of each:1) No Action (what if nothing was done) – very few were in support of no action being taken2) Alternative 1 – most people were not in favor of this alignment because of it being too farnorth and therefore not really helping reduce travel time as well as the potential impact tosurrounding property owners. Additionally this alternative appeared to impact more parksand open space.3) Alternative 2 – more people than not were in favor of this alignment due to the minimalamount of environmental impact and the appearance of the most direct connection.4) Alternative 3 – the majority of those who responded were not supportive of this alignmentdue to the fairly long bridge crossing that would be required (particularly with other optionsavailable in the same area with shorter bridge lengths)5) Alternative 4 – most people were in favor of this alignment stating that it was the mostdirect and straight route6) Alternative 5 – all those who responded did not like this alignment as it had the longestrequired bridge construction stating cost concerns (both construction and maintenance)along with negative environmental impacts7) Alternative 6 – most people were not in favor of this alignment due to the lack of improvedaccess to E-470 and concerns about the ability to preserve the surrounding naturalenvironmentPage B-5
ScheduleWhere Are We in the Environmental Assessment Process? Initiate Project and Define Scope of StudyDefine the Purpose and Need and Initial Design OptionsCollect and Analyze DataDesign Options ScreeningEnvironmental Impact Analysis of Design OptionsPrepare Draft EAPublish Draft EAPublish Decision DocumentWhat’s NextThe next public Open House will be held in the spring of 2015.The draft Environmental Assessment for this project is scheduled for review by the public in thesummer of 2015.Although the initial public comment period is closed, the public is welcome to sign up for theproject mailing list or submit a comment or question by emailing the project team at6thavepkwy@fhueng.com. You may also call the project hotline at 720-200-8929.Page B-6
Page B-7
6th Avenue Parkway Extension Website UpdateMarch 18, 2015 Open House Re-capOverviewThe City of Aurora’s 6th Avenue Parkway Extension project is being documented as anEnvironmental Assessment (EA) following the guideline of the National Environmental Policy Actof 1969 (NEPA). The proposed extension will close a critical gap in the regional transportationnetwork to enhance east-west mobility between 6th Avenue/State Highway 30 and E-470, andaddress increased travel demand from new residential and business growth in the area.In support of the EA process, the project team hosted a second open house March 18, 2015, tofollow up the first open house from December. Conveniently located at Beck Recreation Center,the second open house gave the surrounding community a chance to get an update on theproject’s process, talk with team members and give input on the refined alignments.During the open house, attendees were able to review the need for the proposed project, thealternatives being considered, and the anticipated environmental benefits. Attendees from boththe public and local agencies were encouraged to provide feedback as part of an effort to gatherinput on the project.Station DescriptionThe open house consisted of several different informational stations staffed by the City ofAurora and project team members including: Updated Project Overview – A high-level introduction to the project public outreach area,project history, project purpose and need, vicinity map, alternatives screening process andconsiderations, existing traffic analysis, travel distance and time comparison.1Page B-8
Alternatives Overview – Maps of the six Level 1 alignment alternatives. Displaysdemonstrated the process undertaken since December 3, 2014 that the project team hasused to move from Level 1 (six alternatives) to Level 2 (four alternatives). The overviewalso displayed basic pros and cons of each alternative as well as the future roadway crosssections. Environmental Considerations – Maps of the Section 4(f) properties for parks and trailsin the area, floodways and floodplains in the area, and the locations and types of wildlifeactivity in the project study area. Work Station Map – All open house attendees were asked to participate in this interactiveactivity by writing comments on color-coded sticky notes that corresponded to TrafficOperations and Engineering Considerations (blue), Environmental Considerations(yellow), and/or Property Impact Considerations (red) and place them on an aerial map ofthe project study area with the four refined alternatives. Eight blue comments werereceived, 18 yellow comments were received, and 11 comments were received regardingimpacts to property and access along the alignments.InputApproximately 52 community members attended the March 18 open house from 6 to 8 p.m. Thosein attendance represented a diverse geographical sample of residents in the public process studyarea. Of those 52, over 60% completed a public comment form.Attendees were given the opportunity to provide feedback on the four refined alignments to date;the following summarizes the results of each:1) Alternative 1A – Several people were in favor of this alignment due to it being the mostdirect route using existing 6th Avenue roadway and right-of-way, less impact to parks andopen space, large bridge opening for wildlife crossings, and the least impact to wetlands.In addition, the public acknowledged that alternative 1A affects the most privateresidences.2) Alternative 2A – This appears to be the most favored alignment based on publiccomment. Attendees stated it allows access, has the lowest impact to the wildlife corridorand environment, has the least impact to residents, parks and open space, and appearsto be less expensive than the other three alternative alignments.3) Alternative 4A – Not many of those who responded were supportive of this alignment dueto impact to open space, and impact to eagle and wildlife habitat. There were alsoconcerns regarding the crossing of the floodway and floodplain.4) Alternative 4B – Very few people were in favor of this alignment, stating that there werenot enough positive elements, and that it is too close to the eagle and wildlife habitat, cutsthrough too much land, and appears to be too expensive.2Page B-9
Attendees that participated in the work station activity provided over 35 comments. Below is asummary of the common themes collected (in order of magnitude).Work Station Summary of iderationsProperty ImpactConsideration1. Regional mobility2. Time saving vs. cost3. Improve existing SH 301.2.3.4.Eagle nesting areaDisruption to wildlife patternsAccessibility to open spaceFlooding concerns1. Displacement of currentresidents2. Disruption of future planneddevelopmentMore than half of the open house attendees submitted a comment card with valuable input. Beloware areas of interest that were commonly shared.Number of RespondantsWhat Matters to mizeEnvironmentalImpactMinimizeImpact toPropertyMaintain OpenSpacePromoteConnectivityArea of Interest3Page B-10
ScheduleWhere Are We in the Environmental Assessment Process? Initiate Project and Define Scope of StudyDefine the Purpose and Need and Initial Alternative AlignmentsCollect and Analyze DataAlternative Alignments ScreeningEnvironmental Impact Analysis of Alternative AlignmentsPrepare EAPublish EA / Final Open House (date TBD)Publish Decision DocumentWhat’s NextThe Environmental Assessment for this project is scheduled for review by the public in the latesummer of 2015.Although the initial public comment period is closed, the public is welcome to sign up for theproject mailing list or submit a comment or question by emailing the project team at6thavepkwy@fhueng.com. You may also call the project hotline at 720-200-8929.4Page B-11
Page B-12
Page B-13
Page B-14
Page B-15
October 28, 2015RE:Invitation to Resource Agency Coordination Meeting for the City of Aurora 6th AvenueParkway Extension Environmental Assessment ProjectThe City of Aurora, in consultation with the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) and the ColoradoDepartment of Transportation Region 1 (CDOT), invite you to attend a resource agency coordination meetingfor the 6th Avenue Parkway Extension Project Environmental Assessment (EA). The Proposed Action for thisproject involves the construction of a new roadway alignment on 6th Avenue between State Highway (SH) 30and the E-470 interchange (see the purple line labeled 2A below).This extension of 6th Avenue between SH 30 and the E-470 interchange would close an almost two-mile gapin the major surface arterial street system and would provide a reliable and efficient transportation system forvehicles and bicycles. This project has been identified in previous planning studies dating back as early as1986 and has been identified as a priority project by the City of Aurora City Council.The City of Aurora is leading this project and has retained Felsburg Holt & Ullevig (FHU) to prepare the EA,Preliminary Design, and Right of Way Plans for the Proposed Action Alternative. Technical Working Group(TWG) meetings have been held monthly since October of 2014. Agencies that are part of the TWG includeCDOT, FHWA, Arapahoe County, Urban Drainage and Flood Control District, E-470, and Buckley Air ForcePage B-16
Troy HalouskaColorado Department of TransportationOctober 28, 2015Page 2Base. We also have initially consulted with several resource agencies as part of the project, but this meetingserves as the official coordination meeting.This resource agency coordination meeting is scheduled for November 9, 2015 at 1:00 pm at the City ofAurora offices located at 15151 East Alameda Parkway. The meeting will be held in the Sand Creekthconference room on the south side of the 4 floor.The purpose of the meeting is to introduce your agency to the project or re-introduce your agency to theproject from prior communication, review the project’s purpose and need, review the alternatives screeningprocess, present the Proposed Action and No Action Alternative, obtain agency comment on any importantenvironmental or regulatory issues, and comply with the National Environmental Policy Act. The meetingagenda will include: IntroductionsProject study areaReview purpose and needDiscuss alternatives screening process Present Proposed Action and No ActionAlternativeProject scheduleAgency by agency discussionYour agency’s involvement is valuable as we proceed through the NEPA process. Please R.S.V.P. toJessica Myklebust, by telephone at 303-721-1440 or by email at Jessica.myklebust@fhueng.com byNovember 2, 2015. Please send a representative if you are unable to attend and/or forward this invitation tothe appropriate individual if you feel you are not the correct recipient. If your agency is unable to participate,please let me know if you would like materials or a briefing provided separately.I look forward to your participation, and thank you for your cooperation.Sincerely,FELSBURG HOLT & ULLEVIGJessica MyklebustSenior Environmental ScientistDistribution List:CDOTFederal Highway AdministrationUS Environmental Protection AgencyUS Fish and Wildlife ServiceUS Army Corps of EngineersColorado Parks and WildlifeColorado Department of Public Health and EnvironmentColorado State Historic Preservation OfficePage B-17
Aurora History MuseumLibrary and Cultural Services15151 E. Alameda Parkway, Ste.Aurora, Colorado 80012303.739.6661December 11, 2015Charles AttardoRegion I Planning and Environmental ManagerColorado Department of Transportation (CDOT)RE: Determination of Eligibility and Effects6th Avenue Parkway Extension Project Environmental Assessment,City of Aurora, Arapahoe CountyDear Mr. AttardoThank you for your invitation to provide comment on the above named project. Inreviewing the information provided on the properties within the area of potentialeffects, and cross-referencing the addresses with available survey information andhistoric references, we concur with the findings provided by CDOT, and Felsburg Holt& Ullevig (FHU), within the document Determination of Eligibility and Effects 6thAvenue Parkway Extension Project Environmental Assessment. Our office agreesthat none of the eight individual properties reviewed are currently eligible for local,state, or National Register of Historic Places (NRHP) listing. Therefore, no historicproperties will be affected by the proposed 6th Avenue Parkway Extension Project.Please feel free to contact me with any questions or comments at 303-739-6661.Liz BoyerHistoric Preservation SpecialistHistoric Sites and PreservationAurora History MuseumPage B-18
Page B-19
Page B-20
Page B-21
FEDERAL HIGHWAY ADMINISTRATION/COLORADO DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATIONSECTION 106 TRIBAL CONSULTATION INTEREST RESPONSE FORMPROJECT: 6th Avenue Parkway Extension Environmental AssessmentTheTribe [is / is not] (circle one) interested in becoming aconsulting party for the Colorado Department of Transportation project referenced above, for the purpose ofcomplying with Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act and its implementing regulations (36 CFR800). If your tribe will be a consulting party, please answer the questions below.Signed:Name and TitleCONSULTING PARTY STATUS [36 CFR §800.2(c)(3)]Do you know of any specific sites or places to which your tribe attaches religious and cultural significance thatmay be affected by this project?YesNoIf yes, please explain the general nature of these places and how or why they aresignificant (use additional pages if necessary). Locational information is not required.SCOPE OF IDENTIFICATION EFFORTS [36 CFR §800.4(a)(4)]Do you have information you can provide us that will assist us in identifying sites or places that may be ofreligious or cultural significance to your tribe?YesNoIf yes, please explain.CONFIDENTIALITY OF INFORMATION [36 CFR §800.11(c)]Is there any information you have provided here, or may provide in the future, that you wish to remainconfidential?YesNoIf yes, please explain.Please complete and return this form within 30 days via US Mail, fax or Email to:Dan Jepson, Section 106 Native American LiaisonColorado Department of TransportationEnvironmental Programs Branch4201 E. Arkansas Ave., Shumate Bldg.Denver, CO 80222FAX: (303) 757-9445Email: daniel.jepson@state.co.usPage B-22
TRIBAL MAILING LIST6 Ave. Parkway Extension EAthTribal Chair (Primary Contact):Mr. Lyman Gui, ChairmanApache Tribe of OklahomaP.O. Box 1330Anadarko, OK 73005Mr. Eddie Hamilton, GovernorCheyenne and Arapaho Business CommitteeCheyenne and Arapaho Tribes of OklahomaP.O. Box 38Concho, OK 73022Mr. Wallace Coffey, ChairmanComanche Nation of OklahomaP.O. Box 908Lawton, OK 73502Ms. Amber Toppah, ChairwomanKiowa Business CommitteeKiowa Tribe of OklahomaP.O. Box 369Carnegie, OK 73015Mr. Dean Goggles, ChairmanNorthern Arapaho Business CouncilNorthern Arapaho TribeP.O. Box 396Fort Washakie, WY 82514Mr. Llevando Fisher, PresidentNorthern Cheyenne Tribal CouncilNorthern Cheyenne TribeP.O. Box 128Lame Deer, MT 59043Mr. W. Bruce Pratt, Interim PresidentPawnee Nation of OklahomaP.O. Box 470Pawnee, OK 74058Send Copy of Letter and Attachments to:N/AMr. Henry Little Bird, Sr., Arapaho DirectorCultural Heritage ProgramCheyenne and Arapaho Tribes of OklahomaP.O. Box 203Geary, OK 73040Ms. Karen Little-Coyote, Cheyenne DirectorCultural Heritage ProgramCheyenne and Arapaho Tribes of OklahomaP.O. Box 145Concho, OK 73022Mr. Anthony Monoessey & Ms. Margaret MurrowNAGPRA RepresentativesComanche Nation of OklahomaP.O. Box 908Lawton, OK 73502Ms. Amie Tah-bone, NAGPRA RepresentativeKiowa Tribe of OklahomaP.O. Box 369Carnegie, OK 73015Ms. Yufna Soldier Wolf, THPONorthern Arapaho TribeP.O. Box 396Ft. Washakie, WY 82514Mr. James Walksalong, THPONorthern Cheyenne TribeP.O. Box 128Lame Deer, MT 59043N/ACDOT Region & Consultant (Send copies of oneletter and the mailing list to):Carol Coates, CDOT Region 1 EnvironmentalMr. Thor GjelsteenFelsburg, Holt & Ullevig6300 South Syracuse, Ste 600Centennial, CO 80111Page B-23
Page B-24
Page B-25
Page B-26
Page B-27
Page B-28
Page B-29
Page B-30
Page B-31
COA Project: R-1656FHU Project: 114046-016th Avenue Parkway ExtensionList of Agency and Public Involvement ActivitiesDateActivitySeptember 10, 2014Pre-NTP Coordination MeetingSeptember 19, 2014Kickoff MeetingSeptember 23, 2014Purpose and Need MeetingSeptember 25, 2014Internal Kickoff MeetingOctober 6, 2014PMT Meeting #1October 7, 2014Internal Environmental Kick-off MeetingOctober 7, 2014Public Involvement Coordination MeetingOctober 9, 2014Technical Working Group (TWG) Meeting #1October 12, 2014Preliminary Engineering Kickoff MeetingOctober 16, 2014Public Involvement Coordination Meeting #4October 29, 2014Aurora Parcel – PROS Land Restrictions MeetingNovember 3, 2014PMT Meeting #2November 12, 2014Public Involvement Coordination Meeting #2November 13, 2014TWG Meeting #2November 25, 2014Public Involvement Coordination Meeting #3December 8, 2014PMT Meeting #3December 11, 2014TWG Meeting #3December 16, 2014Aurora Parcel – PROS Land Restrictions Meeting #2January 7, 2015Trust for Public Lands (TPL) Coordination MeetingJanuary 8, 2015TWG Meeting #4January 12, 2015PMT Meeting #4January 14, 2015Internal MeetingJanuary 21, 2015Traffic Meeting #1January 26, 2015Greater Outdoors Colorado (GOCO) MeetingJanuary 27, 2015City of Aurora’s Open Space Advisory Board MeetingJanuary 28, 2015Floodway and Floodplain MeetingJanuary 29, 2015Traffic Meeting #2February 2, 2015Arapahoe County Open Space MeetingFebruary 3, 2015FHWA Section 4(f) Meeting MinutesPage B-32
6th Avenue Parkway ExtensionList of Agency and Public Involvement ActivitiesPage 2DateActivityFebruary 9, 2015PMT Meeting #5February 12, 2015TWG Meeting #5February 13, 2015Baseline Inventory Report Meeting with EROMarch 9, 2015PMT Meeting #6March 11, 2015Traffic Meeting #3March 12, 2015CDOT MeetingMarch 12, 2015TWG Meeting #6March 13, 2015Coordination Meeting with Lend LeaseApril 7, 2015PMT Meeting #7April 9, 2015TWG Meeting #7April 15, 2015Internal MeetingApril 27, 2015Conceptual Drainage, Water Quality, and Costs MeetingApril 28, 2015Urban Drainage Flood Control District (UDFCD) MeetingMay 5, 2015City of Aurora PROS – Proposed Action MeetingMay 6, 2015ARCO Proposed Action MeetingMay 11, 2015PMT Meeting #8May 13, 2015E-470 – Proposed Action MeetingMay 13, 2015FHWA – Proposed Action MeetingMay 14, 2015Section 6(f) MeetingMay 14, 2015TWG Meeting #8June 4, 2015Greater Outdoors Colorado MeetingJune 8, 2015PMT Meeting #9June 11, 2015Drainage MeetingJune 22, 2015Profile MeetingJuly 13, 2015PMT Meeting #10August 10, 2015PMT Meeting #11 – CANCELLEDAugust 17, 2015Drainage MeetingSeptember 8, 2015PMT Meeting #12September 10, 2015TWG Meeting #10September 25, 2015Traffic Meeting #4October 5, 2015PMT Meeting #13October 8, 2015TWG Meeting #11October 15, 2015Schedule MeetingOctober 28, 2015CDOT Section 4(f)/Section 6(f) MeetingOctober 28, 2015Drainage MeetingPage B-33
6th Avenue Parkway ExtensionList of Agency and Public Involvement ActivitiesPage 3DateActivityOctober 28, 2015Section 6(f) Meeting #2November 9, 2015Resource Agency Coordination MeetingNovember 9, 2015PMT Meeting #14November 12, 2015ROW MeetingNovember 12, 2015TWG Meeting #12December 4, 2015ROW Meeting #2December 7, 2015PMT Meeting #15December 10, 2015TWG Meeting #13December 18, 2015Coordination Meeting with Kathleen Mansfield-HallJanuary 11, 2016PMT Meeting #16January 14, 2016TWG Meeting #14February 3, 2016Colorado Parks and Wildlife Section 6(f) MeetingApril 14, 2016TWG Meeting #15June 1, 2016USFWS meeting for Bald Eagle coordinationThe Project Management Team (PMT) consisted of representatives of the following: City of AuroraArapahoe CountyFelsburg Holt & UllevigThe Technical Working Group (TWG) consisted of representatives of the following: City of AuroraArapahoe CountyCDOT R1 and Environmental Programs BranchFHWABuckley AFBE-470 Public Highway AuthorityFelsburg Holt & Ullevig (FHU) team and sub consultantsPage B-34
Appendix B - Agency and Stakeholder Coordination The environmental assessment process included a comprehensive public and agency involvement program, which complemented the technical studies and analyses conducted by the project team. Public involvement included general public meetings, one-on-one meetings with property owners, webpage
Coordination Chemistry Coordination compounds neutral coordination compounds include the metal and its bound ligands the number of bonds in a coordination complex does not correlate with the formal oxidation state of the metal coordination complexes can also be charged –complex cations or complex anions in a complex ion,
Coordination Chemistry!Coordination compound!Compound that contains 1 or more complexes!Example "[Co(NH 3) 6]Cl 3 "[Cu(NH 3) 4][PtCl 4] "[Pt(NH 3) 2Cl 2] Coordination Chemistry!Coordination sphere!Metal and ligands bound to it!Coordination number!number of donor atoms bonded to the central
Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency. Defense Commissary Agency. Defense Contract Audit Agency. Defense Contract Management Agency * Defense Finance and Accounting Service. Defense Health Agency * Defense Information Systems Agency * Defense Intelligence Agency * Defense Legal Services Agency. Defense Logistics Agency * Defense POW/MIA .
Coordination Chemistry II: Isomers and Coordination Geometries Chapter 9 Monday, November 16, 2015. A Real World Example of Stuff from Class! Isomerism Coordination complexes often have a variety of isomeric forms. Structural I
MAPPING CARE COORDINATION NORT H WEST REGIONAL REPORT . 8 . Figure 3: Northwest Region Primary Responsibilities in Providing Care Coordination . Infrastructure/Supports Needed to Improve Care Coordination ("Wishes") The final level of the Care Coordination Framework includes the systems-level actions that are needed to
The National Institute for Health Research (NIHR), Chief Scientist Office (CSO) Scotland, Health and Care Research Wales, and the Public Health Agency Northern Ireland invites people to use the UK Standards for Public Involvement in all types of research activity. . Public Group for supporting analysis and reporting of public consultation .
Reframing Family Involvement in Education One of the most powerful but neglected supports for children’s learning and development is family involvement both in and out of school. Over 40 years of steadily accumulating evidence show that family involvement is one of the strongest predictors of children’s school success, and
First Contact Practitioners and Advanced Practitioners in Primary Care: (Musculoskeletal) A Roadmap to Practice 12.9 Tutorial record 75 12.10 Tutorial evaluation 76 12.11 Multi-professional Supervision in Primary Care for First Contact & Advanced Practitioners - course overview 77
