Final PEL Study (2018)
- Final Report
- Appendix A – Corridor Conditions
- Appendix B – FHWA Questionnaire
- Appendix C – Intersection Configurations and Signal Timing
- Appendix D – Public Engagement and Technical Meetings
- Appendix E – Conceptual Design Plans
- June 26, 2017 – Public meeting to present and collect feedback on recommended alternatives for SH7/Arapahoe Road enhancements
- Boulder County and its consultants will present recommended alternatives for enhancements for SH 7/Arapahoe Road aimed at meeting the needs related to the anticipated growth of the area/region and corresponding traffic demands by improving transit, cycling, and pedestrian facilities along the corridor between Hwy 287 and 75th Street.
- April 26, 2017 Public meeting to share information and gather feedback on the BRT and PEL studies
Arapahoe Road/State Highway (SH) 7 is a critical east-west arterial in the regional transportation system serving Boulder, Lafayette, unincorporated Boulder County, Erie, and the north Denver metropolitan area. The State Highway 7 (75th Street to US 287) Planning & Environmental Linkage (PEL) Study is being conducted to continue the efforts of CDOT’s original SH 7 PEL which looked at the corridor between Brighton and US 287.
The SH 7 (75th to 287) PEL seeks to understand how mobility currently functions on the corridor and makes recommendations for multimodal improvements that will meet future mobility needs in order to:
- Enhance safety for all users
- Meet growing demand for mobility within and along the corridor for all modes of transportation
- Respect local values by preserving the rural, natural, and historic characteristics of the area
- Ensure the route remains a viable transportation corridor that anticipates regional population and employment growth
Learn more by reading the complete SH 7 (75th to 287) PEL Purpose and Needs Statement
We Need Your Help – Feedback Request
Public input is crucial to the success of this work and to the future of this corridor. Use the project’s online comment form to tell us what you think. Specifically, we’re looking for feedback surrounding:
- Is anything missing or incorrect in the Purpose & Needs Statement?
- Which DRAFT cross section alternatives (below) are preferred and why?
- Are there cross section alternatives or features we should add, remove, or rethink from the existing alternatives?
- Did the Corridor Conditions Report (available below) miss anything?
Corridor Conditions Report
A DRAFT Corridor Conditions Report has been completed outlining existing and projected traffic volumes, safety components, and environmental, natural, and cultural resources on the corridor. This report laid the groundwork to understand the issues (safety, lack of bike lanes, pedestrian space, etc.) and limitations (right-of-way, hazardous materials, etc.) on the corridor and provides a framework for alternative highway cross-sections to be developed.
The project team worked with municipal partners, elected officials, and agency stakeholders to develop a draft vision statement and a purpose and needs statement for the PEL Study that outlines the goals for the corridor. This information has informed the development of a variety of highway cross sections and evaluation criteria for the corridor that is being used to screen the cross sections.
Additional SH 7 PEL Uses
This type of study also takes preliminary steps toward obtaining a National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) clearance by performing analysis that identifies likely impacts to natural, cultural, and historic resources. Preliminary resource analysis that takes place in a PEL study allows future transportation design and construction efforts to proceed more smoothly, avoiding known impacts where possible often resulting in more rapid project development and lower cost implementation.
Long Range Planner