Speaker 4: Thank you very much. We look forward to it. Thank you. All right. We have a third proclamation, proclamation number 247. And I would call on Councilman Montero to read the proclamation.
Speaker 7: Thank you, Madam President. Proclamation number 247. Well, concerning the reconstruction of Interstate 70 through Northeast Denver, whereas while the Globeville, Elyria and Swansea communities are already endowed with a vital constellation of unique community assets from school and recreation facilities such as Swansea Elementary School and Swansea, the Park Argo Pool and the Colorado Miners Recreation Center to resource providers such as Clinic Byock Focus Point, Family Resource Center, Street Kids and Valdez, Perry Library, the many historic churches to community gathering spot such as the Grow House and the Global Community Center. The reconstruction of I-70 has a potential to better connect local families and children to these assets and better leverage the important resources already available within the community for its residents to build upon and improve their quality of life. Whereas Denver City Council acknowledges the generations of Globeville, Elyria and Swansea are residents who help, who have endured the daily disadvantages imposed by living in the shadow of the elevated I-70 Viaduct and supports furthering the work of the many stakeholders and residents and business owners who have been diligently collaborating for several years to determine the best possible design for the now deteriorating 50 year old transportation facility. And. Whereas, it is a vital function of the I-70 corridor to continue to serve nearly 700 local businesses, including many large freight distribution centers and other freight dependent enterprises. Maintaining direct and convenient highway access to the National Western Complex, which is vital to the long term success of the National Western Stock Show, and for providing safe and swift vehicle passage between downtown and Denver International Airport. And. WHEREAS, these concerns are supported by many adopted city goals and neighborhood plans, including the revitalization of specific neighborhoods, with the understanding that it's important to facilitate moving people through various means of transportation rather than just vehicles and reducing vehicle miles traveled and greenhouse gas emissions through appropriate environmental standards. And. Whereas, in 1964, I-70 was designed through the neighborhoods of Globeville, Elyria and Swansea are having a devastating impact on the neighborhoods from the loss of homes and residents, the loss of sustainable resources and access to resources within the community, and the overall loss of values of homes. And. Whereas, Federal policy says that if a program will have a disproportionate, disproportionately high and adverse effect on minority or low income populations, that program may only be carried out if further mitigation measures or alternatives avoid, minimize or mitigate this disproportionately high and adverse impacts. Some of the adverse effects on the minority and low income residents in Globeville areas. Swansea should be mitigated and include air quality fumes and emission noise and traffic counts, displacement of residents and loss of overall housing and residents to the community. Connectivity and quality of place and jobs and education for residents to rebuild the community. Now, therefore, be it proclaimed by the Council of the City and County of Denver. That section that the city and council, that city that the Denver City Council stresses the importance of all stakeholders to work together to identify land and resources to replace housing lost to the project in the neighborhood at similarly attainable prices, to ensure residents of low and moderate income can continue to live near the new amenities far into the future. Section eight that the Denver City Council and the City of County of Denver in court in partnership with the court, will continue to explore additional options in order to enhance connectivity and to strengthen existing neighborhood historical fabric and finding alternatives to improving the quality of life, environment and economic vitality of this area in conjunction with balancing the overall transportation needs. Section seven. That the Clerk of the city and County of Denver shall attest and fix the seal of the city and county of Denver . To this proclamation and that a copy be submitted to Don Hunt, executive director of the Colorado Department of Transportation.
Speaker 4: Thank you, Councilwoman Monteiro. Your motion to adopt.
Speaker 7: Thank you. Madam President, I move the proclamation to 47 V adopted.
Speaker 4: It's been moved and seconded. I have a Councilwoman Ortega.
Speaker 7: Madam President, I move to postpone consideration of Council Proclamation 247 to Monday, April 14, 2014. And I'd like to explain why. If we have a second.
Speaker 4: Go ahead.
Speaker 7: I ask for a courtesy public hearing tonight on the I-70 proclamation to allow the residents of Globeville, Swansea and Leary and other interested citizens to be heard. It's not unusual for a city council to extend this courtesy to the public and has done so in the past. But unfortunately that request was denied. Council is being asked tonight to adopt a proclamation in support of replacing the current I-70 viaduct with a below grade covered highway. Executive Order 12898 Implementing the Civil Rights Act makes it clear federal agencies must assess whether programs, policies and activities in this case increasing the width of the highway 113%. And we're trying to put up a slide that shows you what the width of this corridor would look like, that it has disproportionate impact on minority and income residents in these adjacent neighborhoods. Actions to avoid and minimize or mitigate the adverse health, environmental and other impacts must be taken. The same order also ensures the full and fair participation by all potentially impacted communities in the decision making process. In the spirit of the executive order and tenants of environmental justice, I view providing the community an opportunity to speak tonight to be a small step towards allowing those impacted by the decision to participate in the decision making process. The Colorado Department of Transportation has asked for a proclamation of support from City Council for the project prior to the completion of the Supplemental Environmental Environmental Impact Statement to assist them as they seek federal funding. Although many in our community are encouraging court to take another look at rerouting the highway, CDA is not considering that option based on the work done in conjunction with their original environmental impact statement on the project. I want to make it clear that I have been generally supportive of the concept because I think there are incredible benefits that the community can see from this particular concept that's on the table. However, I'm not I I've not seen detailed information on what those costs entail for the alternative that others have been proposing. I believe this proclamation goes much further than just looking at the preferred alternative that is on the table. I see that I'm being asked tonight to endorse the cities, the city teams design, vision and detailed planning as spelled out in the proclamation. However, I believe the city is still in the process of defining the vision and the planning is not complete. In the past three months, I have seen several visions for the project. The vision has included a cap over the highway near Swansea, a school with a park or designs that the community will come up with. The vision has included a second cap with commercial space for stores such as a hardware or grocery store to serve the neighborhood. It has included roundabouts. And we're going to show you what that potentially looks like.
Speaker 4: Councilman Ortega, it sounds like you're making comments about the bay.
Speaker 7: It's about why you are proposing. Yes.
Speaker 4: That there will be opportunity to speak to the proclamation. I'd be glad to have you talk about the postponement.
Speaker 7: Well, that's what I'm getting to, if you will. Let me finish here.
Speaker 4: Go right ahead. Think you can get to the postponement?
Speaker 7: So the vision has included this second cap. However, we're not sure exactly what's going to happen at this fast cost corridor, because now the afternoon that many of my colleagues attended a meeting, there was this concept that talked about roundabouts very similar to those that are at I-70 and Pecos. So my point here is there are too many unknowns that have not been worked out. And for us to do a proclamation tonight, they don't have these things clearly spelled out. And to do it before the environmental impact statement, which will define all of these details. I think it's a little concerning and premature. Okay. So in the vision, the vision means growing the highway from 117 feet to 250 feet. So if if it means that right now I'm not there. If the vision includes building a cap without provisions of funding, and who's going to maintain those improvements? I'm not there yet. If the vision is for roundabouts at Vasquez, that removes the land that was previously discussed with the community about being available for redevelopment. I'm not there. So the purpose of the Environmental Impact Statement is to study the positive and negative environmental effects of the proposed highway. So let's wait for the year and get more details nailed down before we adopt the proclamation and with a broad statement of support for the undefined vision. If we need to say that we generally support the below grade replacement of the viaduct, let's just say that and move on and not take the steps to deal with all of these other in-depth issues that are spelled out in the proclamation without knowing exactly how we're going to mitigate the impact and where some of the roads are going to be and those kinds of things. So this is our chance to get it right for these neighborhoods who have been burdened with this I-70 project for the last 50 years. And I hope that city council will adopt a strong position on the major elements on this $1.8 billion project that will, as we've been told, the largest construction project in the state and will take approximately five years of construction that these neighborhoods and anybody that travels this corridor would have to be dealing with. And so by allowing the community the opportunity to weigh in, I think it gives us the assurance that we're looking at all of the issues before this body adopts a proclamation. So that's why I am asking for a postponement for one week to allow us to have a public hearing and allow the voices of the people who will be impacted by this project to weigh in. I know we had public comment at our committee meeting, but those are meetings held during the day. These are working class neighborhoods where generally people can't get off of work and come to meetings during the day. So I respectfully request your support in allowing us to have a one hour courtesy public hearing next Monday night. Thank you.
Speaker 4: Let me be clear about about. Thank you. A motion to postpone takes precedence over the motion to go ahead with the proclamation. So we add that motion to postpone to next Monday has been seconded and watched and we are only voting on the motion to postpone. It is not a motion to have a public hearing. If it's postponed, that can be a second motion. But we have the motion to postpone and it has been seconded. We've heard comments already from Councilwoman Ortega about the motion. I'll call on others who may have comments about the motion to postpone. Councilwoman Kenney.
Speaker 2: Thank you. Madam President, I support this proclamation. I cosponsored it, and I'm ready to stand behind that. But I think that my colleagues know that. I also believe that it should not be up to the whim of one person whether or not there's public hearings before this body. And so I, I, I feel that we will have a community debate on this proclamation. And it's it behooves us to allow that to occur in our chambers where we can then engage. I feel like there's a number of areas where I disagree with those who disagree with this proclamation, and I want the opportunity to share why and how I disagree. And I realize that that will be long and perhaps arduous, but I believe that that is part of our duty, our duty as elected officials. So without at all diminishing my support and the reasons why I think this proclamation is the right way to go. I do believe that we open ourselves up to unnecessary criticism by failing to allow a hearing to occur. So I will be supporting the motion in order to support the principle for which I have stood since I was elected, which is that if people really, really, really want a hearing before this body, there should be a mechanism for which that can occur, whether that be a majority of this council, whether it be a petition process or whether it be some other mechanism. I think we are missing a piece of democracy by not having met. So I need to support this motion tonight. Thank you.
Speaker 4: Thank you, Councilman. CORNISH Councilwoman Robb.
Speaker 6: Thank you, Madam President. It's not my position as the district councilwoman to say there's been extensive outreach on this. What I do know is the process has been going on for 12 years. Admittedly, our proclamation has not been debated for 12 years. I am wondering if there's someone here and I don't see Kelly lead. So it might be Diane Barrett or maybe, sir, if Rebecca White is here from it is Kelley here some 32.
Speaker 7: Vetoes here from.
Speaker 6: Yeah I just would like an explanation of why we are doing this now, how it fits into the timeline. It does fit. Madam President, into debating the postponement.
Speaker 4: It as for debating the postponement, it's not something we usually do for proclamations, but we're debating the postponement.
Speaker 6: Okay.
Speaker 3: Let's start by saying that.
Speaker 6: Whichever one of you was to speak.
Speaker 1: Madam President and members of council. I'm Tony to Vito. I'm the regional one transportation director for Seaboard. So this alternative that we have been working with has been out for the last two years and we have been hundreds of meetings, night times, weekends in the neighborhood talking about this alternative. As we move through this process and we're ready to publish the supplemental draft this summer. We have to be cognitive of the steps that are take with our Transportation Commission to start looking at how do we take on the magnitude of a $1 billion project. And that's where our Transportation Commission is. Our Transportation Commission represents the entire state of Colorado, and that is where they're at right now. And that is why we've been asking council to identify where is the city so we can report back to our commissioners.
Speaker 6: So when when do your commissioners meet? I mean, in terms of a timeline of last week, we heard there was a desire to do this by April 1st and now we're in April what, seventh? What are we today? April 7th and now we're talking April 14th. How does that fit in the timeline? I know we're getting down into details.
Speaker 1: Commission meets monthly, the third week of the month, Wednesday and Thursday.
Speaker 6: Okay. Thank you.
Speaker 4: Thank you, Councilwoman Robb. Councilwoman Shepherd.
Speaker 5: Thank you, Madam President. I am I seconded this motion because I am in favor of more public input. This is an extremely complex process with a lot of moving parts, a lot of moving pieces. There are multiple jurisdictions involved. I've certainly heard a lot from my own constituents regarding this situation, many of which are in the audience this evening. Thank you for your vigilance and your engagement. And I, you know, I, I never I don't think less process is better. We need more transparency here. We need more engagement. I would like to hear from other members of our community as well. I was at a meeting this past Saturday where my very own state senator Lucio Guzman, stood up and said that it would be egregious if this body were not to defer and listen to members of the public on such an important issue. And therefore, I'm supporting this request, this motion. Thank you.
Speaker 4: Thank you. Councilwoman Shephard Katz, I want to take you already comment. I just want to.
Speaker 7: Make one very brief statement, and that is, in the 30 plus years that I have worked for the city of Denver and had extensive involvement in many, many projects on 25, from Alameda to the city limits on the north and I-70 from Colorado Boulevard up to Pico Street. This is the first time I have ever seen the city of Denver move to do a proclamation prior to the environmental impact statement coming out from the Department of Transportation. I understand the importance of the private participation because of the shrinking federal dollars that are that are no longer available to ensure that we have the resources to expand our highway system across this country. And we're seeing these private participation partnerships across the country. But I just think that it's critical to allow the community to weigh in. And so that is why I've made my request. Thank you.
Speaker 4: Thank you, Councilwoman Ortega. All right. We have a motion we have a motion on the floor to postpone the proclamation until next Monday. Madam Secretary. Roll call.
Speaker 5: Ortega Yes. Rob Pass. Shepherd, I.
Speaker 1: Brooks No.
Speaker 5: Brown No fights, no. Herndon, no carnage. Lehman No.
Speaker 1: Lopez, I.
Speaker 5: Monteiro has never.
Speaker 1: I.
Speaker 5: Rob.
Speaker 1: Oh, wait a minute. Like right. I get that here from my buddy here. No, I'm.
Speaker 5: Monteiro.
Speaker 7: No.
Speaker 5: Madam President. No. Oh.
Speaker 6: Wait a minute.
Speaker 4: We have to.
Speaker 6: Pass. I was sort of in the queue to vote and then Councilman Nevett revolted or something.
Speaker 4: Rob, I think it was Councilwoman Rob, you had passed. I was coming back to you. Would you like to make a vote?
Speaker 6: I will vote I.
Speaker 4: And Councilwoman Monteiro, you have. Made a past. You want to vote by vote?
Speaker 7: No.
Speaker 4: No. All right. We have we need you to push your button. Okay. All right. Counts. Madam Secretary. Close the voting. Announce the results.
Speaker 5: Six ice, seven days.
Speaker 4: Seven days. There is no postponement of this proclamation. All right. We are back to the motion to adopt the proclamation. Councilwoman Monteiro has made that motion and it has been seconded. Comments by members of Council Councilwoman Monteiro. Would you like to go first yet?
Speaker 7: Yes, Madam President, I would like to go first. First off. All right. I want to begin by thanking everyone who has been here tonight and all the people that have had conversations, all the knows and all the yeses and all the maybes. It's it's time for us to take the next step forward. And as Councilwoman Ortega has said, she's not there yet. Well, we have to be somewhere and I can't be nowhere. And so I think that it's time for us to be at the table. What is going on here tonight is that the proclamation before us talks about the reconstruction of Interstate 70 through northeast Denver. The portion that I represent of I-70 is the part that goes through Globeville, Elyria, Swansea. This proclamation supports the reconstruction of I-70 in its current location and alignment, and places a new structure below grade between Brighton Boulevard and Colorado Boulevard. This alternative is known as a partially covered, lowered alternative, the PCL. This proclamation does not speak to the once proposed second capping cover that was at the Steele and Vasquez intersection, which I believe is no longer on the table. Creation of the so called second lid at the Steel Vazquez, designed for the second Laird, will not be part of the I-70 East Project due to the fact that stakeholders, which are the Colorado Department of Transportation, city and County of Denver, Adams County and Commerce City, are still working on refining the details of this important intersection. I want to be clear to everyone that if passed, this proclamation is by no means an open ended contract given by the city and county of Denver on behalf of the residents of global all areas once here as an open ended contract. And it does not, in my opinion, weaken the leverage of the Globeville, Illyria, Swansea neighborhoods for the city and county of Denver. In fact, I believe that it elevates the conversation around the mitigation members. It measures that have been talked about for so long. The act of making a condition or a consequence less severe. The idea of us being strong about the mitigation. City county of Denver has the insurance. The intentions of that are to expand the benefits to Elyria and Swansea and global communities as well as the greater region through this catalytic transportation project. Sierra has mentioned many times their expertize is creating highways, not communities. By acknowledging and accepting this limitation. They have agreed to work closely with the residents who will be impacted by I-70. And again, I want to speak for the area that I represent, and that's Globeville, Elyria, Swansea. It is important to remember that the renovation of I-70 is crucial and long overdue because of its current state. The viaduct is unsafe, which makes this reconstruction mandatory. Having this in mind, see, that has already begun the work necessary for right of way purchasing of homes and businesses to those residents which will be relocated. There are people already receiving the notices of eligibility for relocation assistance, which puts the owner in direct contact with sports liaison Curtis Morrison as a councilwoman for these neighborhoods. I acknowledge and painfully understand many of the many of the concerns of the residents that I represent in Globeville, Elyria, Swansea. I have actively advocated for Sea-Tac to work with the city of Denver and the global Elyria Swansea residents to work in an honest and diligent manner towards making the reconstruction of I-70 less severe on the people from Globeville, Elyria and Swansea. I want to share with you the things that have been said to me by the people that I represent in Globeville, Elyria and Swansea. Here are some of the things that they have. They're not limited to only certain things. But here are a few of the things that keep coming back to me. People in Globeville, O'Leary and Swansea here want to minimize the number of lanes for the design of the highway. People in Globeville, delirious once a year, want to minimize the number of residential and commercial properties that will be relocated by the project. People in Globeville, O'Leary and Swansea here want better North-South connectivity. People in Globeville, in Swansea, Elyria want the measure of air quality during and after construction. People in Global Delirious wants you want noise, quality mitigation. People in Global and Swansea area want better access to I-70 interstate for residents and and industry. People in Globeville and Swansea. Malaria want to create ways to expand the affordable housing stock in the areas people in Globeville, Elyria and Swansea want to create a better environment where they can live, work and actually have a life and play like the rest of Denver residents do. People of Globeville, delirious once here, want to expand the number of acreage for community gathering spaces. People are global. O'Leary and Swansea here want to redirect heavy commercial vehicular traffic away from residential areas. People from Globeville, O'Leary and Swansea want assurance that the project follows the EPA and Title six requirements. All of these mitigations are very important and have great value and need to these communities, and it is important that we continue to hear their voices and to pray to prioritize their needs. It's important that the city and county of Denver and CDOT that we all continue to make them a priority and to have their mitigation issues heard. In conclusion, I do believe that this is the best option for the people in Globeville, Elyria and Swansea. It's unfortunate that these three neighborhoods have become sort of the center of other conversations and other forces that are working their way around them. But for the people in Globeville and Swansea and Elyria, it's important that these mitigation issues be listened to. It's important now, that is, we're doing this heavily that CDOT work with us and help us get to the remedy for these neighborhoods that have, it's no surprise, have lived with the environmental justice issues of the past. So it's my hope and believe that the city and county of Denver will continue to be an important partner as this as we go forward in this next step, should this proposed proclamation pass and that we continue to work towards all of the things that people in this neighborhood, in these neighborhoods that I represent would like so that they can go on and enjoy their quality of life the way that probably other people do. Thank you.
Speaker 4: Thank you. Councilwoman Monteiro. Councilwoman Ortega.
Speaker 7: Thank you, Madam President. I know how hard Councilwoman Monteiro has worked on this project. She? She is my friend. We've worked together for many, many years and she spelled out all those issues that she has been working on alongside the city staff from Public Works and our planning department and the folks from the Colorado Department of Transportation . I'm I'm reluctant to support this proclamation for moving forward because our mayor has already submitted a letter pledging Denver's support to this preferred alternative. Alongside with Mayor Ford from Commerce City. So Denver's already been on board saying they support this concept. And I'm not willing to give up city council's leverage to ensure that we look out for these neighborhoods and make sure that all these details get worked through. And it's in this the environmental impact statement where we get to see those details. As I said, many of which are still being worked out, they're not they're not complete. So we don't know what we're being asked to vote on. Other than saying we support this new preferred alternative, this as many in the community are referring to as the cut and cover concept. We don't know what's going to happen at vast squares. We don't know exactly where the road that will connect Globeville, Swansea, Elyria, the gets removed when 46th Avenue is gone. That's their current connection because not everybody uses the elevated highway. And so having that connectivity is is vital to these communities. It's vital for the people who live there and the businesses to get in there now, as well as the emergency responders being able to serve these communities. So I you know, I'm not I'm not there. I cannot support this tonight, given that these issues are still up in the air and unresolved. And we don't know exactly what we're being asked to support other than the cut and cover concept without details on all these other aspects that are yet to be resolved. So thank you, Madam President.
Speaker 4: Thank you, Councilman Ortega. Councilman Lopez.
Speaker 1: Thank you, Madam President. I want to thank everybody for coming out. I, I don't support this proclamation, and I don't support this proclamation for a lot of reasons. But for the main reason I do not support this proclamation is because in 2003, I was one of the one of the outreach folks going door to door. And we hit every door, every household as part of the environmental impact statement and an outreach effort that was unprecedented. And I've since seen have not seen an outreach effort like was like was done in 2003. And from about June to December, a lot of us who were community organizers in the neighborhood who had understood how to canvass, went door to door and had an extensive survey that asked about the neighborhood, about the highways, impact on the neighborhood and the future of the highway in the neighborhood, and asked folks that opinion about what they thought would be the best idea and the best alternative. Just open ended question. There were rumors of a double decker highway going through the neighborhood. That wasn't going to happen. I can't tell you how many times I heard from Globeville all the way to Green Valley Ranch from 56th, all the way down to Martin Luther King Boulevard. Martin Luther King Junior Boulevard. How many times folks said, get this highway out of our neighborhood. This highway is killing us. I remember vividly going in the swamps here where my mom taught at Swansea Elementary School a long time ago when I was a kid, and we would always feel the ground shake every time a tractor trailer would roll by. I remember going in the backyard just off Saint Paul where my God brother had lived and a woman saying, Let me show you the impact of the highway. She goes to the back, takes her laundry off of the clothesline and shakes it off. And you see dust come off. This isn't dirt from her yard. This is break dust. This is debris. This is particles falling into her yard. This is a drop zone or hundreds of thousands of cars roll by here. This is where my friends who grew up in this neighborhood suffer from asthma. All of them. I can't tell you which one doesn't. They all have asthma in this neighborhood. This is the same neighborhood where an incredible activist by the name of Lorraine Granado defended this community and taught me how to organize and taught me to the meaning and the virtue and. The importance of fighting for the underdog. And around that time it was I think it was a news article that came out in the post for the Rocky Mountain News. God, I miss those. I must be in a two paper town where they had said that the zip code was the most polluted zip code in the state. I think it's important for us to realize our place in history, whether it's ten lanes or eight lanes or actually down the middle where they put a cap and cover or two caps and cover. It's still a highway through a neighborhood. And then there is an alternative. There is an alternative that nobody talks about. Nobody looks seriously at. And that is the reroute and the reroute through to 70, which most of the residents in this corridor from Green Valley Ranch all the way down had supported. Thousands of doors. Eight months on the doors. And this is what we heard it. Nothing has nothing to do with the folks who are working at Sierra and, you know, making their, you know, doing the best that they can. I know I've been approached. I know they've been really honest with me. I know they've been very professional with me. I they mean well, this isn't their decision. This is a political decision. This is a once in a lifetime project. It's a it's a project where we can correct history, where we can correct a very bad thing in history that cut these neighborhoods off from the rest of Denver. We have the opportunity to correct that. We have the opportunity to do the right thing. And the right thing would be to take this highway out of these neighborhoods. There are no houses or elementary schools under 270. There are no kids playing street racquetball football around 270. It's a hot potato. It's a very big political issue. And you know what? There is a lot of validity to the argument that there's no connectivity to so many that we'd have to go back and rebuild all that infrastructure. Which is true. But where is Denver going to be 50 years from now, 100 years from now? Where are those neighborhoods going to be? Where are those children going to be? Where are the children and the folks that have asthma going to be? Are we going to look back and we say, well, did we do the right thing or did we miss the opportunity to do the right thing? This is it. This is the point in history that we have to make this decision. We are at it. Here it is. Whether it's a city council passing a nonbinding proclamation or seat on. In our lifetime, we're going to have some issues to deal with. Health wise, environmental wise. And if we don't do anything about it now, we're going to regret it sorely in the future. And. Out of everybody in this room. And I'm not trying to one up everybody when I say this, but just sincerely, I wish you could have here could have heard what was on those doors. I think maybe there's one other person. Jenny from Globeville. They did organizing with me and Lorraine. I wish you could hear heard what was on those doors, because you would vote completely different on this. You would not support this one bit. So, Madam President, I, I wanted to end my comments, but I wanted to give my $0.02. I know this vote may not be in our favor. I know we're going to be a minority losing vote. We've gotten used to that on this council. But there's a right thing to do. And from the bottom of my heart, from somebody who was part of the yellow shirt brigade, reroute this highway. Thank you.
Speaker 4: Thank you, Councilman Lopez.
Speaker 3: Okay. Councilmember us.
Speaker 0: Thank you. Thank you, Madam President. I wanted to I'm wanted to let folks know and my constituents know why I chose not to have more public input on this proclamation. And, number one, we did have a conversation in Lodi that was open to public comment. But number two, which is really important and hasn't been mentioned yet, is every third Wednesday in Globeville or in Swansea, there is a meeting held by Seedat where you will get between 30 and 60 residents voicing their opinions of what is going on in this neighborhood. That is critically important for us as council folks to hear. And it's important for the people in this room to hear as well. These meetings will continue going on for the next two years. These meetings will go on until the final IRS is release in recorded decision in March 2016. So while it is important and Councilwoman Kenney eloquently put this, it is important that we're hearing more and more feedback. The folks that I'm concerned about the most are the folks who live six blocks from me in Globeville or Swansea. I want to hear what they're saying about all of these issues. Let me just touch on the reroute, because, you know, in a perfect world. Yes. Let's do the. I live in the neighborhood. I'm six blocks away. But here's the reality. We have some complex jurisdiction issues and we have had Adams County Commerce City write letters of opposition against this. And this is a regional political hot potato. That's one. Two. If if we did in a perfect world, see that did reroute. Who is going to deconstruct I-70 from the Mousetrap to Colorado Boulevard? The city of Denver. And who is going to pay for that? You. So it's things like that that we need to begin to think about. And lastly, we would have to open up a whole new year, which which is another ten year process. Now, I got to give a lot of credit to that because I met with that two years ago and he began talking to me about this. Now, although we disagree on this, one thing that I love more than anything is consistency and faithfulness. And that's what you've been in this whole in this whole deal. But I disagree with the overall outcome, but I do agree that there are some major issues when it comes to air quality, some major issues when it comes to 5 to 10 lanes, which, by the way, you are this proclamation does not touch on. This is a macro level perspective saying we generally support. The cap and cover. Which if you've studied this in other cities, 80% of this is in high income neighborhoods. And it's really well done. And we're getting it in in our neighborhood. Is it the best that we would ever want? No, but it is an option that we need to take advantage of. And let me say, I want to remind people how far we come from, because I remember when the east had us looking north and south and getting a viaduct. The community has continued to work and push Cedar to a place. Well, now we have the the underground option with the covered piece as well. We're not done yet. There's still two years of work to be done, and we as a community can come to the table. And begin to talk about this. Let me say specifically some of the issues that I'm looking at. This proclamation kind of generally gives the approval. And to see that to say, yes, we support the cap and cover, but there are some micro issues that are not worked out that I believe we need to work on. IMO you would see that and say how can we begin to get some of these issues that have been laid out eloquently by are the council folks? How can we address these issues? We must address these issues. The RFP has not been released. The RFP has not even been drafted yet. And I have information today that that we will have some members on our public works team that will create the criteria for our RFP. There's so much work that can continue to be done where we can work, we can see if we can get points for the design elements and things like that. That I think is incredibly important. The other pieces and I had a conversation with a community leader today and, and she said, Alvis, you know, one of the things that's so frustrating is the economic inequality. How will we know that minority contractors will have a seat at the table? How will we know that there will be some revenue sharing with these neighborhoods? And these are all issues that I want to advocate for and work on. Now, we don't need to get all of those issues worked out in the proclamation. Those issues need to be worked out in some sort of IMO you with Don Wit see that to make sure that we can begin to look at some of these things. I am. I'm supportive of this. And I know that there's a lot of a lot of angst about what can happen. And I will say that each of the council members up here should feel the weight, because this is a 100 year, 100 year highway. And there will be a lot of responsibility weighed on each and every one of us. But the responsibility. It shouldn't be up here while we're grandstanding. It should be in the next two years working to get the best project possible. Angle over Larry Swanson for the city of Denver. And so I hope that we will be able to do that. And I hope that we can come together and figure out some ways to make that effective. Thank you.
Speaker 4: Thank you. Councilman Brooks. Councilman Nevitt, Councilman Monteiro. We'll go because she's been sick for so. Go ahead.
Speaker 1: I'm. I'm sorry.
Speaker 4: You're next. Oh.
Speaker 1: What do you know? Thank you. Oh, I understand. Thank you, Madam President. First off, I just want to thank Councilwoman Monteiro for. Being such a warrior for the neighborhoods through which I-70 goes and for being such a steadfast warrior on this project. This has been something that she has had to grapple with, deal with for the entire time that she's been on council, which is an amazing and amazing enterprise. And I think she's shown. An astounding combination of leadership and listening and caution and courage and has struck the balance between those and has had to over and over and over again. So I appreciate all of those qualities that she's shown over the last decade and more to bring us here to this point where we as a city, the city council with the mayor's office are saying we have made a decision about how to deal with this facility, I-70, and we're going to move forward with this plan and make it as good as possible. Now, all that said, of course, the objections from some of my colleagues are I think I'm right on the money. We don't we don't we don't have a clear or at least a perfect. We don't have perfect clarity of what this cut and cover project will ultimately look like. This process is a little backwards. It would be nicer to have this completely done and have the design completely done before we say, Yeah, we're in. That looks good to us. Unfortunately, we don't have that kind of time. We're facing a shortage of time and a whole lot of work to do and an opportunity to execute on a over $1,000,000,000 project that will transform North Denver for 100 years. And we could blow it or we could get it right. And we I concede this. We do not have 100% certainty that we're going to get it right. We have to move forward with uncertainty or elect to do nothing, in which case the facility will sit there for another several decades, poisoning the communities that it runs through . That's not an option that I want to take. So, again, this is a judgment call for all of us. And Councilman Brooks put it well when he said this is this is a really big deal. I know I take no umbrage and find no fault with colleagues of mine who say, I do not know enough. I'm not willing to move forward. I'm not willing to say yes at this point. But for me, everything that I've seen so far, all the progress that I've seen in the conversations with CDOT, in working with SeaTac by public works and CBD, all the changes that have been made to the design, beginning with the abandonment of the reconstruction of the viaduct itself and reintroducing the cut and cover as a concept that was enormous progress. All the things that I've seen, all the progress that I've seen us make and the work that Seerat has put in tells me that we have a very we have a high likelihood of achieving something. That is what I want. And that, I think will be of enormous benefit, not just to the communities of global Elyria and Swansea, but for all of Denver. So with that uncertainty, but with sufficient confidence to say, yes, I want to say yes, we're in the cut and cover is the way to go. And we will continue to work with the community and with that to make this the best project we can possibly make it, to restore connectivity through the neighborhood, to recreate the streets so their neighborhood streets, to provide access to the community and to industry, to I-70, and to make this city a better place. So I'm in I'm willing to say yes and move forward. Thank you, Madam President.
Speaker 4: Thank you, Councilman. Councilwoman Shepard.
Speaker 5: Thank you, Madam President. But in the last 48 to 72 hours, I've heard a tremendous amount from constituents citywide. But about 60% of the e-mails that I have received in that time are actually from folks that live in northwest Denver. And I know a lot of you have all been quoted on them as well, because I know that they were sent to Denver. And I've had a lot of conversations with people. I've had multiple meetings with Mr. Texas as well, who I'd like to thank for his unflagging vigilance to this this issue. A lot of the folks I've talked to in the last few days were actually around when I-70 was originally built and have witnessed firsthand, both at the time that it was built and since, the immense amount of destruction that it has caused to Denver and to North Denver specifically. All night I'm sitting here looking at Mr. Bob May's sign, which says, No vote before a public input. Those of you who are not able to read it, you know, and I'm sitting here looking at it and I'm thinking to myself, yeah, you know, you know what's in the phrase cart before the horse comes to mind, right ? We have already determined that, you know, we're going to get the results of this in July. So why are we jumping to throw our support behind something, as I've mentioned, that is so complex with so many moving parts, so many other jurisdictions involved, so many details that we don't even understand yet. Why are we jumping to offer our support at this point for something that we have so few unknowns about? Now, I don't I want to be clear that I don't think anyone has bad intentions here at all. And, you know, good folks from Seattle, I'm looking at you in the back row. I've had multiple meetings with all of you. I don't believe you're bad people. I don't believe you're trying to, you know, hurt anyone or further endanger a community. But it concerns me when when my one of my colleague, Councilman Nevett, says we don't have the kind of time to listen to what the results of the earth are before we decide whether we're going to support it or not. It's $1,000,000,000 project, a two year project process for the IRS and a ten probably multiple year buildout. I think we've got the time to wait for a few months personally. You know, folks from that I know we've had multiple meetings. You have heard me out. I appreciate that. And Judy, tonight has spoken. Councilmember Mattera has spoken eloquently about Globeville, Elyria, Swansea. But I also have neighborhoods that border I-70 directly. And I'm going to name those specifically Sunnyside and Berkeley Regis. And they're not that. Although they may not be direct stakeholders in this process, they're not all that far away, distance wise, from where this this project will be happening. And there's there's still so many questions and there's not a lot of trust. There really isn't. It is very, very hard for folks from my community to hear that we need four managed lanes in each direction compared to what we already have. For them to hear that and for us to talk about adding cars, building for cars, building for all this future traffic, and for them to believe you when you say that it's not going to affect folks west of the mouse trap. And I know I'm going to get, you know, box for saying this later. But when two people are holding on to a rope and there's a lot of tension and pulling on one side, that is all the way down to that rope and you feel it on the other side. It doesn't just dissipate into the air. So I can really understand, folks, that's concern, you know, about the need for these extra managed lanes and then why people are so worried when they hear that only 4% of traffic will be heading west on I-70 from the mouse trap. So I really sympathize with those concerns. I stand up every month. I spend some of my office hours at the Willis case golf course, and I look out over that beautiful area down into Berkeley Park, and I try to imagine what it was like long before that freeway came there. And it's beautiful now, but I'm sure it was 200 times more beautiful back then. I'm a doubting Thomas. To use another metaphor, I need to see to believe we're being asked to wrap our brains around an incredibly complex, difficult project that we've never seen before, that we have no knowledge of. Like, I just. I'm not there yet. I'm not there yet. Many of us will be on a on a trip in June to Seattle, where we're going to have an opportunity, I hope, to see another freeway in this country that has been buried. And I really want to continue to do due diligence on all of this and to see, for example, that particular submerged highway and see, you know, how that worked out, learn more about the process. And so, like I said, I'm not there yet. I'm not ready. I can't support this proclamation tonight. I still need to learn more. And thank you.
Speaker 4: Thank you, Councilwoman Shepard. Councilwoman. Thank you. Madam President, let the council speak. Go ahead, Councilwoman.
Speaker 2: Thank you, Madam President. Really very valuable debate tonight, I think. Here's my perspective. I think there are a couple of things that everyone in this room and outside this room agrees with. So let's identify those. One The existing highway is horrible. We don't want it to stay like it is a minute longer than it has to. And in spite of the fact repairs were made, you know, to to help stretch a little more life out of it. It didn't make it a long time bridge. It is still a deficient bridge. It still needs to go and it still is harming the quality of life in that neighborhood. So I think we all agree on that. Second thing I think we all agree on is that the details of this project aren't even close to final. I think we all agree. I heard it from every colleague up here. I heard it in every email that I got from those again in the room and not in the room. So we agree. So if we agree on those things, what is it that we disagree on? First, I think we disagree on what happens if Denver rejects this design. Now, I think some people believe that if we say no to this design, that magically a reroute will occur and that we can take some time and that the money will still be there and that the opposition can be worked through. I want to give you I think one of the things that's important in any debate is to make sure everyone has the same information. So I'm going to share some information that I have. I sat at a statewide transportation funding table representing the city and county of Denver for more than two years. At that table, I saw slide after slide in the decline in capital improvement dollars that the state of Colorado has for new projects, the vast majority of it goes for maintenance, repaving. All the things we'd want them to do to keep the existing roads in existence. And then I heard list after list and project after project of the demand from places across the state. And I also heard SeaTac get beat up at every meeting about how all the money comes to the metro area. Folks, make no mistake, there is opposition to funding big projects and investing more in Denver and in the Metro. I think that is misplaced analysis based on the tourists we deliver to the rest of the state through our airport, based on the commerce and industry, based on the products that pass through here. I think it's misplaced, but it's real. And I think that we are sorely underestimating the potential to lose the funding we need to make this project a reality. If we don't support the general concept of the cut and cover and give that signal. And that really is what it is. It's a signal in order, frankly, for CDOT to do what they need to do, which is to continue to push back against all those other project demands and say because of the tourists that this corridor delivers to the rest of the state, this is a good statewide investment because of the commerce and industry. It's a good statewide investment. And so what we need from Seattle is we need dollars. We don't just need them for the core projects, but we also need them for all of the other mitigation. So I want to get there next. So I think that, again, just to share with the information I have is and why I feel that this is a risky proposition to try to reject a bird in hand for a distant hope that I think is is not going to happen for something else. The second thing I think we disagree on is whether we're not we get more out of CDOT without this proclamation or with it. It's so simple. Right. But I really do think that is one of the fundamental disagreements that we have. And so I want to share why I believe and my expectations for both our city departments and CDOT. I believe that we get more out of that by signaling our support because there is enough certainty then, frankly, for my staff and our staff to turn the screws. And here's a list of all these potential mitigation items. Here's what I expect. Instead of a bullet that says improve sideways and pedestrian crossings, I want to see a bullet that says pave X number of feet of sidewalks, redo X number of pedestrian crossings instead of saying, you know, explore improvements to surrounding housing. I wanted to say replace windows, replace foundations or whatever on X number of homes. I expect us to negotiate that level of detail with CDOT following this proclamation. I expect us instead of saying. Saying, you know, air quality monitoring to say air quality mitigation or other types of specifics. And if we don't get to those places with DOT. What I want our city to say is sorry, we're not ready to sell you that piece of right away that you need. Sorry. We're not ready to provide that development approval that you need. Sorry, we're not ready to work with you on that piece. I expect and I think many of us up here, maybe not as strongly worded, expect those types of things to occur after this proclamation. And if they don't, I expect us to not let the project go forward in the myriad of other ways that we have as a city. So please don't take this proclamation and at least my vote for it as any kind of acquiescence that we're okay with vague items or that we're okay with where we're at in the negotiations. We do have a ways to go. Those things do need to be in detail. Some of them legally need to be in the air. For example, I expect to see that to pay for a good portion of these covers and other things that we are talking about. And there may be things like housing that are more for Denver to pay for, but things that need to be in the air will need to be in the air. And even after this, if we're not down to the number of feet of sidewalks, we should get there shortly afterwards. So. So I just I think that I respect people and my colleagues view that that that this is is early. I just simply believe strategically that we will get further on the list of demands. Less of requests. List of needs. List of civil rights. Scale mitigation. By signaling our support for this option. And so for those reasons, I recognize we won't get to consensus, but I believe strongly that we'll be leaving this proclamation with a work plan that many, if not all of us, will be happily continuing to babysit and shepherd and watchdog. And so that's my commitment to you as I vote yes on this proclamation tonight. Thank you, Madam President.
Speaker 4: Thank you, Councilwoman Kennish. Councilwoman Robb.
Speaker 6: Thank you, Madam President. It's always a privilege and intimidating to follow Councilwoman Kanis, who made very cogent arguments in a very logical way. So I'm not going to go through a lot of it, since I agree with much of what you said, except to say, yes, it's premature. I don't think waiting three or four months will even give us the details we need. At that point, a lot will be in the air. Several still be a lot to work out afterwards. Yes. To Paul Lopez's point, it is definitely political. And I think because we have a city election coming up in 2015 and we probably won't have the record of decision by or it will be close. I can understand why county commissioners don't want to take the risk on just the mayor's letter because maybe someone here and I'm not I'm not trying to start a rumor, but maybe someone here will be running against the mayor. So it is political. And the only other thing I wanted to say, I am concerned about the environmental concerns. I know when T-Rex was done, there were concerns. Environmentally, they sound there's air pollution, there's the ambient dust, which is part of air pollution. But I will tell you, if we put a fifth in, I read this in an email from someone in Globeville leery of swans here, that it actually wasn't an email. It was a blog that Councilman Brooks forwarded us today. If we had a 50,000 car boulevard through Global Elyria, Swansea, it, you got to believe there's going to be a good deal of dust and air pollution and emissions right at grade, right where people are crossing, right where people are walking. I've seen it from living near Speer Boulevard. I don't live near Santa Fe, so that's my brief comments. And they lasted longer than I thought. Thank you.
Speaker 4: Thank you, Councilwoman Robb. Okay. I think that we are probably ready for the vote.
Speaker 5: Madam Secretary Montero I never i. Ortega rob. I. Sheppard, no.
Speaker 0: Brooks, i.
Speaker 5: Brown I. Fights i. Herndon I can each five. Layman I. Lopez. No. Madam President, I.
Speaker 4: Madam Secretary, to close the voting, announce the results tonight.
Speaker 5: Three days.
Speaker 4: Ten eyes, three nays. The proclamation does pass. Councilwoman Monteiro, is there somebody you'd like to invite to the podium or to answer?
Speaker 7: Yes. Thank you, Madam President. Mr. DeVito, would you like to come back up to the podium?
Speaker 1: Madam President and Members of Council, I am very pleased to accept this proclamation on behalf of the Colorado Department of Transportation this evening, and I express my thanks for your leadership and partnership. I've enjoyed the opportunity to personally brief most of you on this project and appreciate the many difficult questions that you did ask me. 2014 is an important year. It marks the 50th year since the I-70 viaduct was opened to traffic. It also brings CDOT into a second decade of our now 11 year study to determine the future of this interstate. In that 11 years, we are achieve where we're going above $20 Million on this study. This proclamation comes at an important juncture. CDOT is poised to take the next step towards completing this and developing a plan for financing this project. This is the biggest project we have ever undertaken. This proclamation provides certainty for us to move forward with the partial covered, lowered alternative as our preferred option. And as I said earlier, which we first presented to the public two years ago, it gives our Transportation Commission the certainty they need to take the next steps on behalf of Colorado taxpayers. Knowing that the city is united in support of this billion, billion dollar investment, perhaps it's just important for me to note again what this proclamation doesn't signify. It does not signify the end of our close collaboration with Denver City staff, the DCC and you, the Council. We have significant work yet to accomplish and expect our Denver partners to be closely involved as they have up to this point. It doesn't signify any change to the course of this or to the significant environmental justice mitigations that we as a department have committed to. These commitments are a defining feature of the year, and their importance cannot be understated. Neither neither does this proclamation change the city's ability to hold us to our commitments or to continue negotiations as we move toward a final record of decision, which is the legal binding contract for CDOT and FH CWA, and it doesn't signal signify any abatement in our public outreach process, which will continue to be as robust as it has been. As I mentioned before, the magnitude of the I-70 East Project is unprecedented for CDOT. So too is our level of our partnership with the city of Denver. This proclamation continues that partnership and brings us closer to removing this viaduct and to bringing long overdue improvements to this part of Denver. Thank you again.
Speaker 4: Thank you, Mr. DeVito. Okay. Moving right along. We need to have Madam Secretary read the resolutions.
A proclamation concerning the reconstruction of Interstate 70 through Northeast Denver. A proclamation concerning the reconstruction of I-70 East Steele/Vasquez Interchange Configuration through Northeast Denver.
