Public Participation

Understanding the ideas, perspectives, and needs of key stakeholders in the corridor area is critical to building broadly supported decisions and solutions.  CDOT provided multiple opportunities for the local jurisdictions, regional partners, and general public to engage and inform the study.  The public outreach plan included the following:

Broad Public Outreach: The general public was actively engaged, ensuring meaningful input was provided on the goals and objectives, alternatives, and priorities for the phasing of recommended improvements.  Two interactive public meetings were held:

  • Public Meeting #1 was held February 5, 2015 at Clifton Community Hall. At this meeting, the transportation study was introduced, the study process explained, and existing corridor condition information was presented. Input on corridor transportation issues and problem areas were solicited and ideas for potential solutions gathered. Click here to view documents presented at the meeting. Click here for a summary of public comments received surrounding Public Meeting #1.

  • Public Meeting #2 was held September 29, 2015, at Clifton Community Hall. At this meeting, the alternatives evaluation and draft study recommendations were presented, and public input was solicited to refine the study recommendations before they were finalized. Click here to view documents displayed at the meeting. Click here to view a summary of comments received surrounding Public Meeting #2.

Community Focus Group Meetings: In July 2015, during the alternatives development and evaluation process, the project team met with community resource panel focus groups representing stakeholders directly affected by the corridor transportation conditions and potential improvement alternatives.  

Two Focus Groups were formed: one with area residents, commuters and multimodal advocates, and the other with corridor business representatives. The project team met with each of these groups on July 28, 2015 at the Clifton Hall to present improvement concepts and the initial alternatives evaluation and solicit feedback that will be used to shape the study's recommendations. 

Technical Team: The Technical Team (TT) met frequently with CDOT and provided technical input as the study progressed.  The TT included staff from the local communities of Mesa County, Palisade, and Grand Junction, and agencies including the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA), Grand Valley Metropolitan Planning Organization (GVMPO), and Grand Valley Transit.  The members of the TT kept their respective elected officials updated and served as the primary connection with their communities and organizations.

  • Visioning Workshop: Early in the study, an interactive Visioning Workshop was held with the TT members to shape the goals and desired outcomes of the US 6 corridor transportation improvements. This was used to inform the project purpose and need and the development and screening of alternatives.