Geospatial data about Jefferson County, Colorado Road Names. Export to CAD, GIS, PDF, CSV and access via API.

Polygon vector map data covering county boundaries for El Paso County, Colorado County containing 1 feature.

Boundary GIS (Geographic Information System) data is spatial information that delineates the geographic boundaries of specific geographic features. This data typically includes polygons representing the outlines of these features, along with attributes such as names, codes, and other relevant information.

Boundary GIS data is used for a variety of purposes across multiple industries, including urban planning, environmental management, public health, transportation, and business analysis.

Available for viewing and sharing as a map in a Koordinates map viewer. This data is also available for export to DWG for CAD, PDF, KML, CSV, and GIS data formats, including Shapefile, MapInfo, and Geodatabase.

​

This web map created by the Colorado Governor's Office of Information Technology GIS team, serves as a basemap specific to the state of Colorado. The basemap includes general layers such as counties, municipalities, roads, waterbodies, state parks, national forests, national wilderness areas, and trails.Layers:Layer descriptions and sources can be found below. Layers have been modified to only represent features within Colorado and are not up to date. Layers last updated February 23, 2023. Colorado State Extent: Description: “This layer provides generalized boundaries for the 50 States and the District of Columbia.” Notes: This layer was filtered to only include the State of ColoradoSource: Esri Living Atlas USA States Generalized Boundaries Feature LayerState Wildlife Areas:Description: “This data was created by the CPW GIS Unit. Property boundaries are created by dissolving CDOWParcels by the property name, and property type and appending State Park boundaries designated as having public access. All parcel data correspond to legal transactions made by the CPW Real Estate Unit. The boundaries of the CDOW Parcels were digitized using metes and bounds, BLM's GCDB dataset, the PLSS dataset (where the GCDB dataset was unavailable) and using existing digital data on the boundaries.” Notes: The state wildlife areas layer in this basemap is filtered from the CPW Managed Properties (public access only) layer from this feature layer hosted in ArcGIS Online Source: Colorado Parks and Wildlife CPW Admin Data Feature LayerMunicipal Boundaries:Description: "Boundaries data from the State Demography Office of Colorado Municipalities provided by the Department of Local Affairs (DOLA)"Source: Colorado Information Marketplace Municipal Boundaries in ColoradoCounties:Description: “This layer presents the USA 2020 Census County (or County Equivalent) boundaries of the United States in the 50 states and the District of Columbia. It is updated annually as County (or County Equivalent) boundaries change. The geography is sources from US Census Bureau 2020 TIGER FGDB (National Sub-State) and edited using TIGER Hydrology to add a detailed coastline for cartographic purposes. Geography last updated May 2022.” Notes: This layer was filtered to only include counties in the State of ColoradoSource: Esri USA Census Counties Feature LayerInterstates:Description: Authoritative data from the Colorado Department of Transportation representing Highways Notes: Interstates are filtered by route sign from this CDOT Highways layer Source: Colorado Department of Transportation Highways REST EndpointU.S. Highways:Description: Authoritative data from the Colorado Department of Transportation representing Highways Notes: U.S. Highways are filtered by route sign from this CDOT Highways layer Source: Colorado Department of Transportation Highways REST EndpointState Highways:Description: Authoritative data from the Colorado Department of Transportation representing Highways Notes: State Highways are filtered by route sign from this CDOT Highways layer Source: Colorado Department of Transportation Highways REST EndpointMajor Roads:Description: Authoritative data from the Colorado Department of Transportation representing major roads Source: Colorado Department of Transportation Major Roads REST EndpointLocal Roads:Description: Authoritative data from the Colorado Department of Transportation representing local roads Source: Colorado Department of Transportation Local Roads REST EndpointRail Lines:Description: Authoritative data from the Colorado Department of Transportation representing rail lines Source: Colorado Department of Transportation Rail Lines REST EndpointCOTREX Trails:Description: “The Colorado Trail System, now titled the Colorado Trail Explorer (COTREX), endeavors to map every trail in the state of Colorado. Currently their are nearly 40,000 miles of trails mapped. Trails come from a variety of sources (USFS, BLM, local parks & recreation departments, local governments). Responsibility for accuracy of the data rests with the source.These data were last updated on 2/5/2019” Source: Colorado Parks and Wildlife CPW Admin Data Feature LayerNHD Waterbodies:Description: “The National Hydrography Dataset Plus (NHDplus) maps the lakes, ponds, streams, rivers and other surface waters of the United States. Created by the US EPA Office of Water and the US Geological Survey, the NHDPlus provides mean annual and monthly flow estimates for rivers and streams. Additional attributes provide connections between features facilitating complicated analyses.”Notes: This layer was filtered to only include waterbodies in the State of ColoradoSource: National Hydrography Dataset Plus Version 2.1 Feature LayerNHD Flowlines:Description: “The National Hydrography Dataset Plus (NHDplus) maps the lakes, ponds, streams, rivers and other surface waters of the United States. Created by the US EPA Office of Water and the US Geological Survey, the NHDPlus provides mean annual and monthly flow estimates for rivers and streams. Additional attributes provide connections between features facilitating complicated analyses.”Notes: This layer was filtered to only include flowline features in the State of ColoradoSource: National Hydrography Dataset Plus Version 2.1 Feature LayerState Parks:Description: “This data was created by the CPW GIS Unit. Property boundaries are created by dissolving CDOWParcels by the property name, and property type and appending State Park boundaries designated as having public access. All parcel data correspond to legal transactions made by the CPW Real Estate Unit. The boundaries of the CDOW Parcels were digitized using metes and bounds, BLM's GCDB dataset, the PLSS dataset (where the GCDB dataset was unavailable) and using existing digital data on the boundaries.” Notes: The state parks layer in this basemap is filtered from the CPW Managed Properties (public access only) layer from this feature layer Source: Colorado Parks and Wildlife CPW Admin Data Feature LayerDenver Parks:Description: "This dataset should be used as a reference to locate parks, golf courses, and recreation centers managed by the Department of Parks and Recreation in the City and County of Denver. Data is based on parcel ownership and does not include other areas maintained by the department such as medians and parkways. The data should be used for planning and design purposes and cartographic purposes only."Source: City and County of Denver Parks REST EndpointNational Wilderness Areas:Description: “A parcel of Forest Service land congressionally designated as wilderness such as National Wilderness Area.”Notes: This layer was filtered to only include National Wilderness Areas in the State of ColoradoSource: United States Department of Agriculture National Wilderness Areas REST EndpointNational Forests: Description: “A depiction of the boundaries encompassing the National Forest System (NFS) lands within the original proclaimed National Forests, along with subsequent Executive Orders, Proclamations, Public Laws, Public Land Orders, Secretary of Agriculture Orders, and Secretary of Interior Orders creating modifications thereto, along with lands added to the NFS which have taken on the status of 'reserved from the public domain' under the General Exchange Act. The following area types are included: National Forest, Experimental Area, Experimental Forest, Experimental Range, Land Utilization Project, National Grassland, Purchase Unit, and Special Management Area.”Notes: This layer was filtered to only include National Forests in the State of ColoradoSource: United States Department of Agriculture Original Proclaimed National Forests REST Endpoint

City limits of the City of Aurora, Colorado. The City of Aurora, Colorado (at 164.8 square miles) sits in three different counties: Adams County, Arapahoe County, and Douglas County and lies just east of the City and County of Denver. The city's population is estimated at over 400,000 and is currently the 50th largest city in the U.S.A. The city is annexing land in enclaves and to the east of the city, please check back frequently for the latest data.

The Pagosa Springs geologic map is of the 7.5-minute quadrangle of the same name. It is located in southwestern Colorado, USA and shows the town of Pagosa Springs. The mapped area is southwest of the San Juan volcanic mountains (Oligocene) and north of the San Juan Basin. All bedrock units exposed in the map area are Upper Cretaceous in age except a minor canyon outcrop of Upper Jurassic rock. Pre-Holocene Quaternary age deposits are mainly alluvial gravels and outwash on terraces. Structure is simple: shale and sandstone beds dip at low angles east to northeast as a broad limb of the north-northwest striking Archuleta Anticline. Three geologic cross sections controlled by drill holes are included and depict Mesozoic bedrock and faults down to and including shallow Precambrian basement rock. A brief geologic history of the region is described.

Colorado Community Anchor Institutions (CAI) Feature Class Summary This layer represents the National Telecommunications Information Administration (NTIA) State Broadband Data Development Program (SBDD) Community Anchor Institutions (CAI) which subscribe to broadband. Description Introduction This layer represents the National Telecommunications Information Administration (NTIA) State Broadband Data Development Program (SBDD) Community Anchor Institutions (CAI) which subscribe to broadband. ''Community Anchor Institutions'' consist of schools, libraries, medical and healthcare providers, public safety entities, community colleges and other institutions of higher education, and other community support organizations and entities. These locations may not offer broadband availability to the public (although most libraries and many schools, and community centers do) but rather offer an opportunity for policy makers to understand where community anchor institutions who have broadband access are which can help in identifying challenges and opportunities to reaching national connectivity goals. For additional information visit NOFA (Notice of Funding Availability) website: http://www.ntia.doc.gov/broadbandgrants/nofa.html Intent The primary source of information has been online address and location research, in combination with google maps and NAIP aerial imagery. Ideally, our end goal is to have every county maintain and provide data directly. The advantage being that local officials have more direct access to acquiring accurate data for their respective counties, and more experience within these counties. Secondly, it will allow each county to sustain accurate CAI data without being reliant on the state government. For example, if Hinsdale county sustained its own CAIs, it would not need to wait on the state to complete and update their CAI data. Achieving this goal will provide the counties in Colorado with accurate and useful data without the limitations of being bottle necked by a single data editing source. Process The existing CAI point data is edited and maintained using ESRI Arc Desktop 10.1. Points have first been verified for their spatial accuracy. They are overlayed onto NAIP aerial imagery. Using a combination of online sources, such as Google Maps and Google Earth, the address and location of each point is verified. If the point is inaccurately positioned, it is moved to the correct location. Attributes are also check for accuracy and updated. Sometimes street names or address numbers are not present, and must be identified through research. Presently a total of 5478 CAI locations have been researched and edited. We were unable to indentify the definitive location of 4% of these CAIs. This results in a favorable 96% accuracy rate thus far. This dataset will be continuously checked and improved upon as time goes on. In addition, CAI locations have been contacted in order to acquire internet speed test results. Currently 1356 of the total Community Anchor Institutions have speed test results. We will continute to add to this number as time goes on. Finally, this data will be accessible and modifiable via GIS services. This will allow county officials to actively edit the data. Data Fields The following items are the fields within the CAI feature class. There are several different field types within this dataset. The bold faced portion is representative of the field name, while the following text represents the type of the field as well as length, precision, and scale. Additionally, OBJECTIDand SHAPE are generated by Arc Map. OBJECTID- ObjectID Longitude- Double P38 S8 OITIndex- Short Latitude- Double P38 S8 AnchorName- String 200 FKProvider- Short FullAddress- String 200 KEY_- Short StreetAddress- 50 URL- String 100 Status- Short CAICategory - String 2 AddressNumber- Long CAIID- String 50 NumberSuffix - String 15 FullCensusBlockID- String 16 StreetPreModifier - String 10 TransTech- Double P38 S8 StreetPreDirectional - String 20 BBService- String 1 StreetPreType- String 20 PublicWiFi- String 1 StreetSeparator - String 10 CAIComments- String 255 StreetName - String 75 BBComments- String 255 StreetPostType- String 20 MaxAdDown- String 2 StreetPostDirectional- String 20 MaxAdUp- String 2 StreetPostModifier- String 20 SubScrbDown - String 2 SubAddress- String 50 SubScrbUp- String 2 Intersection- String 100 ActualDown- Double P38 S8 PlaceName- String 100 ActualUp- Double P38 S8 District- String 100 TestDate- String 255 County- String 50 ProviderNM- String 255 StateAbbrev- String 50 LocationChanged_Y_N- String 1 ZipCode- Long Done- String 1 Zip4- Short SHAPE- Geometry AddressLocDesc- String 255

Credits State of Colorado, Governor's Office of Information Technology (OIT) Archuleta County Baca County City and County of Broomfield Custer County Eagle County El Paso - Teller E911 Authority Garfield County Grand County La Plata County Larimer County Las Animas County E911 Authority Lincoln County Mesa County Moffat County Montezuma County North Central All - Hazards Region Pueblo County Routt County Use limitations None Extent West -109.011097 East -102.082504 North 40.994186 South 37.005858 Scale Range Maximum (zoomed in) 1:5,000 Minimum (zoomed out) 1:150,000,000 ArcGIS Metadata ► Topics and Keywords ► THEMES OR CATEGORIES OF THE RESOURCE  structure, location, health, utilitiesCommunication * CONTENT TYPE  Downloadable Data EXPORT TO FGDC CSDGM XML FORMAT AS RESOURCE DESCRIPTION No

DISCIPLINE KEYWORDS  Public Service Facilities Broadband Internet Service

PLACE KEYWORDS  Colorado

TEMPORAL KEYWORDS  2014

THEME KEYWORDS  Public Use Structures, Community Anchor Institutions, Essential Facilities, Landmark Features, Key Geographic Locations, Points of Interest, Structures, Public Buildings, Facilities of General Interest, Civic or Government Buildings, Public Service Facilities, Fire Station, Police Station, School, Library, Post Office, Town Hall.

Hide Topics and Keywords ▲ Citation ► TITLE Colorado Community Anchor Institutions (CAI) ALTERNATE TITLES  Colorado CAIs CREATION DATE 2012-08-31 00:00:00 REVISION DATE 2013-02-07 00:00:00 EDITION Early 2013 Local Review Edition EDITION DATE 2013-02-07 PRESENTATION FORMATS  digital map SERIES  NAME Colorado Broadband Map Database

COLLECTION TITLE Colorado Broadband Map Database OTHER CITATION DETAILS The locations and Internet broadband speeds of Community Anchor Institututions within the State are required deliverables to the National Telecommunications and Information Administrations (NTIA) in accordance with the State Broadband Data and Development Grant Program requirements found in Federal Register /Vol. 74, No. 129 /Wednesday, July 8, 2009 /Notices, pages 32548 and 32563. Hide Citation ▲ Citation Contacts ► RESPONSIBLE PARTY  INDIVIDUAL'S NAME Nathan Lowry ORGANIZATION'S NAME State of Colorado, Governor's Office of Information Technology CONTACT'S POSITION GIS Outreach Coordinator CONTACT'S ROLE  publisher RESPONSIBLE PARTY  INDIVIDUAL'S NAME Tudor Stanescu ORGANIZATION'S NAME Governor's Office of Information Technology CONTACT'S POSITION GIS Technician CONTACT'S ROLE  publisher

CONTACT INFORMATION  ► PHONE  VOICE (303)-764-6861 FAX N/A

ADDRESS  TYPE both DELIVERY POINT 601 East 18th Avenue Suite 220 CITY Denver ADMINISTRATIVE AREA Colorado POSTAL CODE 80203-1494 COUNTRY US E-MAIL ADDRESS tudor.stanescu@state.co.us

HOURS OF SERVICE 7:00am - 4:00pm Hide Contact information ▲

Hide Citation Contacts ▲ Resource Details ► DATASET LANGUAGES  English (UNITED STATES) DATASET CHARACTER SET  utf8 - 8 bit UCS Transfer Format STATUS  on-going SPATIAL REPRESENTATION TYPE  vector GRAPHIC OVERVIEW  FILE NAME ColoradoCAIs.png at https://docs.google.com/file/d/0B_O_LJbuRH4azB0RlZ1SUVKMXc/edit?usp=sharing FILE DESCRIPTION Colorado Community Anchor Institutions (CAIs) FILE TYPE Portable Network Graphic file (.png)

* PROCESSING ENVIRONMENT Microsoft Windows 7 Version 6.1 (Build 7601) Service Pack 1; Esri ArcGIS 10.1.1.3143 CREDITS State of Colorado, Governor's Office of Information Technology (OIT) Archuleta County Baca County City and County of Broomfield Custer County Eagle County El Paso - Teller E911 Authority Garfield County Grand County La Plata County Larimer County Las Animas County E911 Authority Lincoln County Mesa County Moffat County Montezuma County North Central All - Hazards Region Pueblo County Routt County

ARCGIS ITEM PROPERTIES  * NAME CAIs.DBO.ColoradoCAI * LOCATION Server=10.12.1.28; Service=sde:sqlserver:10.12.1.28; Database=CAIs; User=stanescut; Version=dbo.DEFAULT * ACCESS PROTOCOL ArcSDE Connection

Hide Resource Details ▲ Extents ► EXTENT  DESCRIPTION The State of Colorado, United States of America GEOGRAPHIC EXTENT  BOUNDING RECTANGLE  WEST LONGITUDE -114.996946 EAST LONGITUDE -96.104491 SOUTH LATITUDE 32.485329 NORTH LATITUDE 45.503973 EXTENT CONTAINS THE RESOURCE No

TEMPORAL EXTENT  BEGINNING DATE 2010-01-01 00:00:00 ENDING DATE 2010-12-31 00:00:00

EXTENT  GEOGRAPHIC EXTENT  BOUNDING RECTANGLE  EXTENT TYPE  Extent used for searching * WEST LONGITUDE -109.011097 * EAST LONGITUDE -102.082504 * NORTH LATITUDE 40.994186 * SOUTH LATITUDE 37.005858

EXTENT IN THE ITEM'S COORDINATE SYSTEM  * WEST LONGITUDE -109.011097 * EAST LONGITUDE -102.082504 * SOUTH LATITUDE 37.005858 * NORTH LATITUDE 40.994186 * EXTENT CONTAINS THE RESOURCE Yes

Hide Extents ▲ Resource Points of Contact ► POINT OF CONTACT  INDIVIDUAL'S NAME Nathan Lowry ORGANIZATION'S NAME State of

The PPACG Boundary feature layer models the boundaries of the Pikes Peak Area Council of Governments (PPACG) region, which encompasses El Paso, Teller, and Park counties in Colorado. The data in this feature class is developed by PPACG from the county boundaries provided by or acquired from the Colorado Department of Transportation (CDOT).The 'Name' field records the name of region, while the 'Label' field provides an alternate value of the name for map labeling. The remaining fields primarily describe the size and area of the region.

This map shows the breakdown of parcel ownership in Weld County by surface owner. The parcels that are 40 acres and larger are labeled with the owner name, the parcels that are between 10 acres and 40 acres are labeled with a number that corresponds to the owner name index and everything smaller than 10 acres is too small to label.

Feature class representing retail alcohol outlet density at the county level developed directly from address information from liquor licensee lists that were obtained from the Colorado Department of Revenue-Liquor Enforcement Division (DOR-LED). This file was developed for use in activities and exercises within the Colorado Department of Public Health and Environment (CDPHE), including the Alcohol Outlet Density StoryMap. CDPHE nor DOR-LED are responsible for data products made using this publicly available data. It should be stated that neither agency is acting as an active data steward of this map service/geospatial data layer at this point in time. This dataset is representative of Colorado licensing data gathered in January 2024. The data file contains the following attributes:Full FIPS CodeCounty Name County FIPS StateCountyLand Area Square Miles (Area of Land in Square Miles)Water Area SquareMiles (Area of Water in Square Miles)Population Total (Total Population as estimated in ACS 2018-2022)Percent Race White (Percent of population identifying as White as estimated in ACS 2018-2022) Percent Race African American Percent (Percent of population identifying as African American as estimated in ACS 2018-2022)Race American Indian Alaskan Native (Percent of population identifying as American Indian or Alaskan Native as estimated in ACS 2018-2022)Percent Race Asian (Percent of population identifying as Asian as estimated in ACS 2018-2022)Percent Race NHawaiian OPI (Percent of population identifying as Native Hawaiian or Pacific Islander as estimated in 2018-2022)Percent Race Other (Percent of population identifying as another race as estimated in 2018-2022)Percent Ethnicity Hispanic Latino (Percent of population identifying as Hispanic or Latino as estimated in 2018-2022)Percent Ethnicity Not Hispanic or Latino (Percent of population identifying as not Hispanic or Latino as estimated in 2018-2022)Percent Race Minority Race or Hispanic Latino (Percent of population made up of a Race and/or Ethnicity other than White, Non-Hispanic)Percent Population over 24 Years No HS Diploma (Percent of population over 24 years old without a High School Diploma as estimated in 2018-2022)Frequency All Retail Outlets 2024 (All retail alcohol outlets from January 2024)Average Distance Between Outlets in Meters (Average distance in Meters between an alcohol outlet and its nearest neighboring outlet)Frequency Off Premises Outlets 2024 (All Off-premises retail alcohol outlets from January 2024)Frequency On Premises Outlets 2024 (All On-premises retail alcohol outlets from January 2024)Rate Total Outlets per Square Mile (Rate of all retail alcohol outlets per square mile)Rate Total Outlets per 10,000 Residents (Rate of all retail alcohol outlets per 10,000 residents)Rate On Premises Outlets per Square Mile (Rate of On-premises retail alcohol outlets per square mile)Rate Off Premises Outlets per Square Mile (Rate of On-premises retail alcohol outlets per square mile)Rate On Premises Outlets per 10,000 Residents (Rate of on-premises retail alcohol outlets per 10,000 residents)Rate Off Premises Outlets per 10,000 Residents (Rate of off-premises retail alcohol outlets per 10,000 residents)Average Distance Between Outlets in Miles (Average distance in Miles between an alcohol outlet and its nearest neighboring outlet)

City of Aurora, Colorado subdivisions. The City of Aurora, Colorado sits in three different counties: Adams County, Arapahoe County, and Douglas County and lies just east of the City and County of Denver. The city's population was estimated at 386,500 on July 1, 2020.

The Statistical Neighborhood boundaries were developed in 1970 by the Community Renewal Program (CRP) which was administered by the current Denver Department of Community Planning and Development. Statistical Neighborhoods are typically combinations of census tracts. Geographic place names, such as Windsor and Mar Lee, were assigned to each area and reflect commonly used names of subdivisions and historical parts of the city.

Created and managed by the Department of Local Affairs (DOLA) at the State of Colorado, this data shows all the active fire protection districts within the state. Attribution includes information regarding the district name, mailing address, website links (if applicable), etc.For more information on special districts in the State of Colorado, visit their website here.

This is my second input on the preliminary Congressional Commission redistricting map, based this time on the census numbers that were released in mid-August. These additional comments again use on Dave’s Redistricting App (DRA), which has the current data for counties and precincts. As of this writing, the commission’s tool did not seem to have the current data loaded. My revised draft alternative is at https://davesredistricting.org/join/b26ec349-27da-4df9-a087-ce77af348056. As background, I participated in redistricting initiatives in South Bend, Indiana, in the mid-1980s and for Indiana legislative seats after the 1990 census. I didn’t engage with redistricting during the rest of my 20-year military career. After retiring, and while serving as Public Trustee for El Paso County, I participated in redistricting efforts at the county and city level. I also stood for El Paso County Clerk in 2010. I have lived in Colorado since 2000. Description of Draft Alternative My process started by identifying large-scale geographic communities of interest within Colorado: the Western Slope/mountain areas, the Eastern Plains, Colorado Springs/El Paso County, the North Front Range, and Denver Metro. Two smaller geographic communities of interest are Pueblo and the San Luis Valley—neither is nearly large enough to sustain a district and both are somewhat distinct from their neighboring communities of interest. A choice thus must be made about which other communities of interest to group them with. A second principle I adopted was to prioritize keeping counties intact over municipalities. County boundaries are fixed, unlike municipal boundaries, and do not interlock based on annexation patterns. Precincts and census blocks do not overlap counties, but they may overlap municipal boundaries. Furthermore, county lines more often correspond to other layers of government than do municipal boundaries. This most matters along the western border of Weld County, which several municipalities overlap while also being rather entangled with each other. I was not able to find a particularly elegant alternative to using the county line that would not then require other communities of interest to be divided.I started with El Paso County, which exceeds the ideal district population (721,714) by 8,681 or 1.2%. It therefore must be split among different districts. El Paso, where I have lived for these past 20 years, is itself a coherent community that should remain as intact as possible – no plan that split it into two large pieces would comply with the commission’s mandate. The best options for moving population into other districts would be on the eastern and western edges. The northern part of El Paso County – Palmer Lake, Monument, Woodmoor, and Black Forest – is much more closely tied to the rest of El Paso County than it is to Douglas County. The small population along I-25 in southern El Paso County is also more closely tied to Fort Carson and the Fountain Valley than it is to Pueblo. The eastern parts of El Paso County, on the other hand – Ramah, Calhan, Yoder, Rush, Truckton – have far more in common with Lincoln County and the Eastern Plains than they do with Colorado Springs. Unfortunately, there is not enough population in the easternmost precincts to bring the county within the population limits. Once you get as far west as Peyton, you are reaching the edge of the Colorado Springs exurbs; once you get to Ellicott, you are reaching communities around Schriever Air Force Base that are part of the community of interest associated with the military. Rather than divide the community of interest there, it would be better to link the precincts in Ute Pass, the Rampart Range, and along the southern part of Gold Camp Road with Woodland Park and Teller County. While I will not claim that they are part of the Colorado Springs community, they are more linked to the larger town to their west than the northern and southern edges of El Paso County are to their neighboring counties. The use of census block data, not yet available on DRA, might allow more fine-tuning of this split that creates District 5 out of all but the western and eastern edges of El Paso County. The true Western Slope is not large enough to sustain District 3, even with the obvious addition of Jackson County and the necessary additions of Lake, Chafee, Park, and Teller Counties. The preliminary commission map would exclude most of the San Luis Valley (all but Hinsdale) from the Western Slope district. Based on the revised census numbers, a district that did this would need to add all of Clear Creek, Gilpin, and Fremont Counties to the Western Slope along with the small part of El Paso County. On its face, this maintains county integrity very well and would be a better map than the preliminary commission map that groups parts of Boulder County into the Western Slope. However, there are two problems with such a design. One would be that it breaks up communities of interest to the east: Gilpin and Clear Creek Counties are more associated with the Denver Metro, and Canon City with Pueblo, than any of them are with the Western Slope. The second problem is that it means any district centered in the North Front Range would need to take on arbitrary parts of neighboring Broomfield and Weld County or an even less-logical division of Arvada or Golden in Jefferson County. The draft alternative map submitted with these comments places the San Luis Valley with the Western Slope. To complete the required population, it adds western El Paso County (as described above), western Fremont County, Custer County, and Huerfano County to the Western Slope district. Certainly, arguments can be made about dividing communities of interest here as well, but ties do exist along the Wet Mountain Valley and across La Veta Pass. Throughout the map – throughout any map – tradeoffs must be made among which communities remain together. The draft alternative District 4 is based on the Eastern Plains. In the south, this includes eastern Fremont County (including Canon City), Pueblo County, Las Animas County, the Lower Arkansas Valley, and parts of far eastern El Paso County. In the north, this includes all of Weld and Elbert Counties, retaining them as intact political subdivisions. It does not extend into Larimer, Broomfield, Adams, Arapahoe, or Douglas Counties. The draft alternative District 2 is placed in the North Front Range and includes Larimer, Boulder, Gilpin, and Clear Creek Counties. This is nearly enough population to form a complete district, so it is rounded out by adding Evergreen and the rest of Coal Creek in Jefferson County. The City and County of Denver (and the Arapahoe County enclave municipalities of Glendale and Holly Hills) forms the basis of draft alternative District 1. This is approximately the right size to form a district, but the complexities of interlocking communities make it sensible to include Bow Mar and a small piece of southern Lakewood in this district and exclude the Indian Creek and Kennedy neighborhoods. This leaves three districts to place in suburban Denver. A great place for a boundary among these three districts that does not split communities of interest is in the area of low population to the northeast of Denver International Airport. District 7 in this numbering (which is arbitrary) would include all of Adams County to the west of the airport: to name only the largest communities, Commerce City, Brighton (except the part in Weld), Thornton, Northglenn, and Westminster. It would also include the City and County of Broomfield, and Arvada and the rest of Westminster in Jefferson County. District 6 would include all of the City of Aurora and the parts of Adams and Arapahoe Counties to its east. It would also include Parker, Stonegate, and Meridian in Douglas County; Centennial, Greenwood Village, and Cherry Hills Village in Arapahoe County; and the Indian Creek and Kennedy neighborhoods in Denver. District 8 would include the rest. It would include all of Jefferson County from Golden and Lakewood south (except for small parts of southeastern Lakewood and western Bow Mar) It would include the rest of Douglas County, including Highlands Ranch, Lone Tree, Castle Pines, and The Pinery. Comparison of Maps Precise Population Equality The preliminary commission map has exact population equality. The draft alternative map has a variation of 0.28% (2,038 persons). This is well within the courts’ guidelines for population equality, without even considering that errors in the census data likely exceed this variation, the census data are already a year out of date, and relative district populations will fluctuate over the next 10 years. Both the “good-faith effort†and “as practicable†language leave room for a bit of variance in service of other goals. The need to “justify any variance†does not mean “no variance will be allowed.†It may be better to maintain unity in a community of interest or political subdivision rather than separate part of it for additional precision. Contiguity The draft alternative map meets this requirement. The preliminary commission map violates the spirit if not the actual language of this requirement. While its districts are connected by land, the only way to travel to all parts of preliminary Districts 3 and 4 without leaving the districts would be on foot. There is no road connection between the parts of Boulder County that are in District 3 and the rest of that district in Grand County without leaving the district and passing through District 2 in either Gilpin or Larimer Counties. There also is no road connection between some of the southwestern portions of Mineral County and the rest of District 4 without passing through Archuleta or Hinsdale Counties in District 3. Voting Rights Act The draft alternative

Plan Information Plan name: Alt. North, East, Southwest, Central Description: Alternate version of my North, East, Southwest, Central map. This creates "high country", "northeast", and "southeast" rural + front range districts, a "south and west" district, and districts centered on Colorado Springs, Denver, Aurora, and Jefferson County with tweaks around the edges to balance population.This map has more split counties than my first "North, East, Southwest, Central" map but provides better regional affinity for Moffat, Baca, and Las Animas Counties.Plan ObjectivesCreates four districts with rural and front range counties as constituents, which I hope will increase collaboration across political divides.This is an alternate version of my "North, East, Southwest, Central" plan which creates more cohesive western slope and eastern plains districts by allowing for more intra-county divisions. Municipalities and Census-Designated Places are kept in single districts with the exception of Denver (too populous) and a few exclaves.The districts in this plan could be characterized as:CD 1: DenverCD 2: High country plus northwest metroCD 3: Western slope, San Luis Valley, and greater PuebloCD 4: Northeast Colorado and the north I-25 corridorCD 5: El Paso CountyCD 6: Southeast Colorado and south metroCD 7: West metroCD 8: Aurora and north metro

Subdivisions in Adams County, Colorado. Data is maintained by the Assessor's Department. Updated weekly.

River Reach Habitat Quality (RFC 2008)

This layer was digitized in 2015 for the HRS Board using data from the 2008 State of the Watershed Report. This layer shows the quality of habitat surveyed by Delia Malone on selected reaches in the Roaring Fork Watershed. This data is intended as a reference for future research and planning, site specific conditions may vary. Strahler Steam Order numbers are also given for each river reach.

River Watch Sites

This layer was digitized in 2015 for the HRS Board using data from the Roaring Fork Conservancy. The layer shows River Watch sites where the RFC and partner organizations monitor stream health indicators. Active sites are marked with an “x” in the popup. To access the data please visit http://cpw.state.co.us/aboutus/Pages/RW-DataSheets.aspx and search for the river and monitoring site of interest. For more information about the program and additional summery data please contact the RFC www.roaringfork.org

Surface Water Realtime (USGS, CDSS)

This layer shows realtime telemetry gauges maintained by the United States Geological Survey and the Colorado Decision Support System. Click on the icon and then click on “more info” to link to the gauge website. This layer can be used to monitor stream flows and diversion tunnel flows (cfs). Please see the USGS and CDSS websites for more information.

Parcel Boundary (Pitkin County GIS 2015)

This layer identifies property boundaries in Pitkin County. The Parcel geometry is created by reading legal descriptions through Plats, Surveys, Deeds, and CAD drawing files. Approximately 15% of land in Pitkin County is privately held, which is represented in this layer. Federal lands are shown in the Forest Lands layer. Please see http://www.pitkincounty.com/458/GIS-Mapping for more information.

Recreation Easement (Pitkin County GIS 2015)

This layer contains recreation easements throughout Pitkin County with attributes that include the easement type, common name and establishment information. Please see http://www.pitkincounty.com/458/GIS-Mapping or Pitkin County Open Spaces and Trails for more information.

Federal Land Boundary (Pitkin County GIS 2015)The parcel layer and Forest (or Federal Land) layer are independently maintained layers. The Forest layer included lands owned by U.S. Forest Service (USFS), Bureau of Land Management (BLM), and the State of Colorado (State of CO). Approximately 85% of the land area in Pitkin County is Federal Land. Please see http://www.pitkincounty.com/458/GIS-Mapping for more information.SNOTEL Sites From NRCSThese files are updated daily around 7:30 am and 12:30 Pacific Time with midnight summaries of the previous day's data. The symbols are color-coded by the current snow water equivalent as a percent of the 1981-2010 normal on this date. Clicking on a symbol will reveal additional information, including a photo of the site, more real-time data, and links to charts and additional reports. Please visit http://www.wcc.nrcs.usda.gov/snotel/ for more information.

Cadastral service for Clear Creek County.NOTE: Parcels and Account Owner tables are updated MWF. Due to the view layer created from this service, no other data in this service is currently being updated as of 1/6/2025.