Central Mountains Area Plan 1 Introduction This Area Plan Is an Update to the 1994 Central Mountains Community Plan
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Load more
Recommended publications
-
Inventory of Existing Conditions
Inventory of Existing Conditions Introduction Boulder Municipal Airport is located in the City of Boulder, Colorado. Nestled at the foot of the Rocky Mountains, the Airport has served an important niche in the general aviation market for the City and its surrounding region. Boulder Municipal Airport is open to the general public and to visiting aircraft. The Airport does not have commercial passenger activity and has been in continuous operation at this site since 1928. Boulder Municipal Airport is located three miles northeast of the City of Boulder, in north-central Colorado. The Airport is located within the Denver metropolitan area, on the eastern fringe of the Rocky Mountain range. The Airport provides a safe operating environment for a variety of general aviation aircraft types, ranging from gliders and small powered aircraft to corporate jet aircraft. The airport’s relative location within the region is illustrated in Figure A1, AIRPORT LOCATION MAP. The City of Boulder is located at the base of the eastern Front Range of the Rocky Mountains in Colorado. Boulder is surrounded by several communities, including Superior, Broomfield, Louisville, Lafayette, Erie, Longmont, and Lyons. Although Boulder has not grown significantly in the last ten years, the exponential growth of the surrounding communities has influenced the City of Boulder and the regional transportation system. While airport planning documents related to the layout of airport facilities have been kept up-to-date, an overall master planning study of airport facilities has not been completed since 1994. During this time, aviation issues on a local, regional, and national level have changed, and the FAA also recommends that an Airport Master Plan be updated every 5-10 years. -
Solutions Found for the Arvada Colorado Police Department Case Study
DRAGON NATURALLYSPEAKING CASE STUDY CHALLENGE SOLUTIONS FOUND FOR THE ARVADA The time and cost of creating police reports was taking COLORADO POLICE DEPARTMENT resources away from other important needs. The city of Arvada Colorado is part of the Denver metropolitan area and has a population of over 100,000 people. The Arvada Police Department has more than 166 SOLUTION sworn officers and was facing a series of problems relating to the use of its third-party Dragon NaturallySpeaking was implemented department- transcription system and report writing. wide, for use throughout the Administration, Patrol and Investigation Divisions. This series of problems was tackled head-on by the department Administration using Dragon NaturallySpeaking voice recognition software throughout the Administration, Patrol and Investigation Divisions. The problems and solutions: RESULTS This 166 officer department saw a 789% Return on COST FACTOR: 789% Return on Investment Investment (ROI), a 50% reduction in time spent on The department was paying a substantial, $200,000 annual fee for third-party reports and greatly reduced lag time on report filing. transcription services. With a one-time purchase of Dragon NaturallySpeaking at approximately 20% of the annual transcription cost, the department was able to eliminate the need for the annual third-party transcription service. The department HOW IT WAS DONE opted for Dragon’s yearly maintenance contract (including free upgrades and no-cost To bring this solution to its department, Arvada Police direct access to the Dragon NaturallySpeaking engineering staff to resolve any issues work closely with Dragon’s Gold Level Partner for Law Enforcement sales and training, Lieutenant John Kane or problems) to help them maintain the solution. -
2012 Comprehensive Plan
Town of Superior COMPREHENSIVE PLAN DECEMBER 2012 ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS iii Acknowledgements Town Board of Trustees Consultants Mayor Andrew Muckle Clarion Associates Mayor Pro‐Tem Elia Gourgouris Foxfire Community Planning and Development Trustee Joe Cirelli Economics & Planning Systems, Inc. Trustee Chris Hanson Russell + Mills Studios Trustee Sandy Pennington Greenplay, LLC Trustee Lisa Skumatz LSC Transportation Consultants, Inc. Trustee Debra Williams The Planning Group (McCaslin Corridor Concepts) OZ Architecture and Team (Town Center) Planning Commission Chairperson Clint Folsom Citizens of the Town of Superior Vice‐Chairperson Bob McCool Commissioner Rozita Abdul‐ Williams Commissioner Joanne Eaton Commissioner Phyllis Hardin Commissioner Robert Mommaerts Commissioner Thomas Ricker Commissioner Rochelle Rittmaster Chairperson John Cracraft (Former) Commissioner Ian Elverson (Former) Vice‐Chairperson Kraig Prestesater (Former) Town Staff Town Manager Matt Magley Assistant Town Manager Beth Moyski Town Clerk Phyllis Hardin Finance Director Paul Nilles Parks, Recreation and Open Space Director Martin Toth Public Works and Utilities Director Alex Ariniello Management Analyst Lisa Ritchie Town of Superior Comprehensive Plan Town of Superior Comprehensive Plan TABLE OF CONTENTS v Chapter 1: Introduction ...................................................................................................................... 1‐1 Purpose of Plan ............................................................................................................................................. -
1920S Small Homes Survey Report
Discover Denver Know It. Love It. One Building at a Time. Survey Report Pilot Area #2 1920s Small Homes Park Hill, Harkness Heights, Grand View Prepared By: Jessica Aurora Ugarte and Beth Glandon Historic Denver, Inc. 1420 Ogden Street, #202 Denver, CO 80218 Rev. May 4, 2015 With Support From: 1 Contents Introduction ............................................................................................................................................................... 4 Funding Acknowledgement ............................................................................................................................... 4 Project Areas .............................................................................................................................................................. 5 Research Design & Methods ...................................................................................................................................... 7 Historic Context ....................................................................................................................................................... 10 Context, Theme and Property Type ......................................................................................................................... 18 Results ...................................................................................................................................................................... 19 Data ..................................................................................................................................................................... -
Fully Sited and Designed to Minimize Visual Impacts, Particularly of Distant Front Range Mountain Views and Open Meadows
20352202035200303500333555 Department of Community Development Douglas County 2035 Comprehensive Master Plan Douglas County Department of Community Development Planning Services Division Douglas County, Colorado Adopted by the Douglas County Planning Commission June 16, 2014 ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS On behalf of the Douglas County Planning Commission, staff would like to thank all those who participated in this incredible effort to aid in Douglas County’s development well into the future. Special thanks to all of the citizens who have Douglas County Community Development Staff participated in the 2035 Comprehensive Master Terence T. Quinn, AICP, Director of Community Plan Update. Without your input, the Plan Development would not be possible. Randy Burkhardt, Assistant Director of Parks, Planning Commission 2014 Trails & Building Grounds Pam Schenck Kelly, Chair Edward Brewer Jennifer Eby, Manager of Community and Jim Dullea Resource Services Clarence Hughes Scott Kirkwood Steve Koster, AICP, Assistant Director of David Simonson Planning Services Stevan Strain Bill Vincent Update Team Krystal Woodbury Joe Fowler Dustin Smith, Alternate Kati Rider, AICP Michael O’Muireadhaigh, Alternate Curt Weitkunat, AICP Lloyd Whittal, Jr., Alternate Editing and Graphics Former Planning Commissioners Kim Smith Gary Dani Gary Weaver Contributing Staff Dan Avery, AICP Board of County Commissioners Jeanette Bare, AICP Roger A. Partridge, Chair Chris Boyd Jack A. Hilbert Donna Coffin Jill E. Repella Dan Dertz Tina Dill Doug DeBord, County Manager Nancy Gedeon Judy -
City of Aurora, Colorado Analysis of Impediments (AI) to Fair Housing Choice
City of Aurora, Colorado Analysis of Impediments (AI) to Fair Housing Choice FINAL July 13, 2016 Prepared by: EV Studio, LLC 1117 Cherokee St Denver, CO 80204 City of Aurora Community Development Division Neighborhood Services Department 9898 E. Colfax Avenue Aurora, CO 80010 2015-2016 Analysis of Impediments to Fair Housing Choice – City of Aurora, Colorado Table of Contents SECTION 1 3 Introduction……………………………………………………………………………………………………………….3 Executive Summary…………………………………………………………………………………………………….4 SECTION 2 12 Community Profile……………………………………………………………………………………………………12 Population…………………………………………………………………………………………………….13 Population by Age…………………………………………………………………………………14 Population by Race……………………………………………………………………………….16 Population by Ethnicity…………………………………………………………………………17 Foreign Born Population……………………………………………………………………….18 Language……………………………………………………………………………………………….21 Disabilities……………………………………………………………….……………………………26 Households……………………………………………………………………………………………………………...27 Household Income…………………………………………………………………………………………28 Median Household income……………………………………………………………………28 Types of Households……………………………………………………………………………..33 Low to Moderate Census Tracts…………………………………………………………….35 Poverty………………………………………………………………………………………………………….39 Employment………………………………………………………………………………………………….42 Employment Status……………………………………………………………………………….42 Occupations………………………………………………………………………………………….44 Travel to Work for City of Aurora Residents……………………………..…………..46 Housing…………………………………………………………………………………………………………48 Occupancy and Tenure………………………………………………………………………….49 -
Chapter 4 the Denver Mountain Parks System 56
Chapter 4 The Denver Mountain Parks System 56 The Denver Mountain Parks System The Denver Mountain Parks The System 57 Chapter 4 The Denver Mountain Parks System 4.A. Systemwide Recommendations Recreation Recommendations Background Today, those who visit the Denver Mountain Parks (DMP) represent a broad cross section of people in demographics, where they reside, and how far they travel to enjoy these mountain lands. Visitors to the Mountain Parks are cosmopolitan – a true mix of cultures and languages. With the exception of African-Americans being under- represented, the Mountain Parks reflect the same diversity of age and ethnicity as occurs at Denver’s urban parks. Although visitors to the Mountain Parks represent the spectrum, many come from low to middle income households. Typically one third of those who visit either a Denver Mountain Park or another county open space park are Denver residents. Another third reside in the county in which the park is located. The last third are visitors from other counties along the Front Range, visitors from other parts of the state and nation, and international visitors. Together, mountain open space lands owned by Denver, Jefferson County, Douglas County, and Clear Creek County are used recipro- cally. Together, they are a regional Front Range open space sys- tem where each county provides its own lands and facilities for the enjoyment of its own residents, recognizing that these lands are also enjoyed by all visitors. The goal for Denver Mountain Parks is to provide the amenities and programs that take advantage of but do not diminish the valu- Red Rocks Park able natural and cultural resources and that meet today’s recre- ation needs and desire to connect kids with nature. -
Denver's Mountain Parks Foundation Kicks Off Capital Campaign
Est. 1970 + Vol ume 45 + Number 4 + fall 2016 The picnic shelter in Filius Park is an excellent example of the Denver Mountain Parks rustic architectural style. Many of these shelters have been neglected and are now in severe disrepair. Photo courtesy: Denver Public Library, Western History Collection Denver’s Mountain Parks Foundation Kicks Off Capital Campaign By Becca Dierschow, Preservation and Research Coordinator was a bold move, but one that the voters of Denver heartily supported. In 1912, In 1916, Denver released a series of tourism booklets promoting the newly the citizens of Denver passed a mill levy that funded the purchase and maintenance formed Denver Mountain Parks system. These 18 page, full color pamphlets of the parks system until 1955. illustrate many features of the Mountain Parks system that are well-known today To create a master plan for the proposed system, Denver tapped the most – Bergen Park, the winding Lariat Loop leading up to Lookout Mountain, and the prominent landscape architecture firm in the country – the Olmsted Brothers. The buffalo herd grazing in Genesee Park. All of these amenities, the pamphlets boast- sons of renowned landscape architect Frederick Law Olmsted, John and Frederick ed, were an easy car ride from Denver. Picnic shelters, fire pits, and well houses Jr carried on their father’s legacy and vastly expanded the firm’s reputation in their welcomed visitors and provided a place of respite from city living. own right. Frederick Olmsted Jr came to Denver in 1912 to oversee the planning The Denver Mountain Parks system was first proposed as early as 1901, as of the Denver Zoo, Civic Center, and City Park, along with the city-wide parkways part of a state-wide trend of preserving natural landscapes for the benefit of urban system. -
Municipal Parks Parkways
MMuunniicciippaall PPaarrkkss aanndd PPaarrkkwwaayyss IN THE CCOOLLOORRAADDOO SSTTAATTEE RREEGGIISSTTEERR OF HHIISSTTOORRIICC PPRROOPPEERRTTIIEESS Office of Archaeology and Historic Preservation Colorado Historical Society DIRECTORY OF MMuunniicciippaall PPaarrkkss aanndd PPaarrkkwwaayyss IN THE CCOOLLOORRAADDOO SSTTAATTEE RREEGGIISSTTEERR OOFF HHIISSTTOORRIICC PPRROOPPEERRTTIIEESS Includes Colorado properties listed in the National Register of Historic Places and the State Register of Historic Properties Updated Through December 2006 Prepared By Lisa Werdel © 2006 Office of Archaeology and Historic Preservation Colorado Historical Society 1300 Broadway Denver, Colorado 80203-2137 www.coloradohistory-oahp.org The Colorado State Register of Historic Properties is a program of the Colorado Historical Society. Founded in 1879, the Colorado Historical Society brings the unique character of Colorado's past to more than a million people each year through historical museums and highway markers, exhibitions, manuscript and photograph collections, popular and scholarly publications, historical and archaeological preservation services, and educational programs for children and adults. The Society collects, preserves, and interprets the history of Colorado for present and future generations. A nonprofit agency with its own membership, the Society is also a state institution located within Colorado's Department of Higher Education The Colorado Historical Society operates twelve historic sites and museums at ten locations around the state, including -
Denver and Area Attractions
A Welcome Guide to DENVER and Area Attractions Adams Arapahoe ˆcompliments Boulder of N ATIONALBroomfield JEWISH HEALTH Denver Douglas Jefferson Adams Arapahoe Boulder Broomfield Denver Douglas Jefferson Adams Arapahoe Boulder Broomfield Denver Douglas Jefferson Adams Arapahoe Boulder Broomfield Denver Douglas Jefferson Adams Arapahoe Boulder Broomfield Denver Douglas Jefferson Adams Arapahoe Boulder Broomfield Denver Douglas Jefferson Adams Arapahoe Boulder Broomfield Denver Douglas Jefferson Adams Arapahoe Boulder Broomfield Denver Douglas Jefferson Adams Arapahoe Boulder Broomfield Welcome to Denver, Colorado National Jewish Health is providing you with this welcome guide to assist with your adjustment to life in Colorado. You may find it helpful to read this guidebook in its entirety or find that only certain sections pertain to your situation. Human Resources is here to assist with your transition to your new life! Our office is located at 1400 Jackson Street, Southside Building, Room G-113, Denver, Colorado 80206. Our offices are open Monday to Friday from 8:00 a.m. to 4:00 p.m. Please call our main number at 303.398.1035 to contact us. We look forward to you joining our National Jewish Health team. Human Resources National Jewish Health The information contained herein is provided as a public service with the understanding that National Jewish Health makes no warranties, either expressed or implied, concerning the accuracy, completeness, reliability, or suitability of the information, nor does National Jewish Health warrant that -
THIS IS ARVADA 2019 Demographic Supplement
THIS IS ARVADA INTRODUCTION POPU LATION Introduction to the 2019 Demographic Supplement Strong Growth This City of Arvada report is the 2019 Demographic Supplement to the Arvada is the seventh largest city in Colorado and the fifth largest in “This is Arvada” report which was prepared in December 2018 and the metropolitan region, following Thornton but with a larger presented to City Council. The “This is Arvada” report can be population than Westminster and Centennial. Arvada’s population in considered the baseline document that examined in detail the key 2018 was estimated at 120,492, representing an increasing of topic areas of People, Housing, Employment, Transportation and also approximately 14,059 residents since the 2010 Census. This translates identified current challenges and opportunities. into an increase of 13.2 percent since the start of the decade. The charts opposite illustrate the actual numbers and the percentage This supplement report provides the most recent American Community increase for our peer cities so as to provide a more comprehensive Survey (ACS) estimates that were released in December 2019 and the picture of rates of growth. While the Denver Metro region has 2018 population estimates from the annual Population Estimates experienced growth driven by an increase in employment and resultant Program. This supplement examines current trends from the major migration to the state, the region also continues to be a destination for topic areas of population, age, race, ethnicity, households and families, families and young adults who are attracted to the outdoor-oriented income and employment, housing, and transportation. The 2014-2018 lifestyle and the amenities that the mountains offer. -
HUD PD&R Housing Market Profile for Denver-Aurora-Lakewood, Colorado
HUD PD&R Housing Market Profiles Denver-Aurora-Lakewood, Colorado Quick Facts About Denver-Aurora- Lakewood By Sam Young | As of January 1, 2015 Current sales market conditions: slightly tight. Current apartment market conditions: tight. Overview The Denver-Aurora-Lakewood (hereafter, Denver) metropolitan Forbes magazine ranked Denver the sixth area is in north-central Colorado, at the eastern edge of the Rocky fastest growing city in the United States during Mountains. Major industries include tourism, health care, telecom- 2015. Strong employment and population munications, and high-technology manufacturing. Leading em- growth contributed to the ranking. ployers include HealthONE LLC, CenturyLink, Inc., and Lockheed Martin Corporation, with approximately 8,350, 6,500, and 4,750 employees, respectively. As a regional center for federal govern- ment agencies, and with the city of Denver as the state capital, the metropolitan area also relies heavily on public-sector employ- ment, with more than 69,000 state and federal employees. • As of January 1, 2015, the estimated population in the met- ropolitan area was 2.77 million, reflecting an average annual increase of 47,600, or 1.8 percent, since July 2010. • Despite weaker economic and housing market conditions from mid-2005 through mid-2010, population growth remained rela- tively strong, averaging 40,900 people, or 1.7 percent, annually, partially because quality-of-life factors attract people to the met- ropolitan area. • Net in-migration averaged less than 40 percent of total pop- ulation growth from mid-2005 through mid-2010, which kept population growth at 1.7 percent annually. Since 2010, net in-migration has nearly doubled, to an average of 28,600 peo- ple, or 60 percent of population growth, annually as job growth increased dramatically after recovering from the effects of the national recession.