Looking southwest over Indiana Street near the Rocky Flats site, the Jefferson Parkway toll road would go straight down the grassy space in the middle of the photo.

Officials from Golden and Boulder, the two cities connected by CO 93, told lawmakers on Wednesday that their $175 million plan to improve the hazardous stretch of road will improve safety and ease traffic congestion – results they say won’t be obtained from building the proposed Jefferson Parkway toll road.

The beltway opponents were joined by Boulder County in making a presentation on currently unfunded CO 93 improvements to the Capitol to the Transportation Legislation Review Committee, an interim House-Senate committee that considers proposals for transportation-related bills.

They advocate intersection improvements including a grade separation at U.S. 6 and Heritage Road near the Jefferson County government center and U.S. 6 and 19th Street, plus shoulders and medians along CO 93. They say the first phases would cost a combined $55 million. They are looking for funding from the federal, state and local level including the Great Outdoors Colorado fund to improve trails in the corridor.

They claimed the Jefferson Parkway would worsen congestion in the northwest quadrant and do nothing to solve CO 93’s safety problems. Portions of the highway have accident rates twice the state average.

The presentation was made by Golden Mayor Jacob Smith, Boulder Mayor Matt Appelbaum and Boulder County Commissioner Will Toor.

“Golden and Boulder feel they have to be proactive to come up with a transportation solution that works,” said John Putnam, an attorney representing Golden on transportation issues.

“This toll road concept isn’t a transportation solution. It’s going to make things worse. A few spots will get better but more spots are negatively affected. And it leaves 93 unsolved.”

You can view a copy of their presentation here.

But after the meeting, the argument was joined by backers of the Jefferson Parkway, a $204 million proposed extension of the metro beltway that would run initially for about nine miles from Interlocken to CO 93 north of Golden.

“How could Jefferson Parkway add congestion to their streets if they say no one is going to use it?” said Kevin McCasky, a Jefferson County commissioner who is chair of the Jefferson Parkway Public Highway Authority. “You can’t have it both ways. Is there a bunch of new traffic that’s just going to show up in neighborhoods?

“If Golden says it won’t work, what are they afraid of?”

The Jefferson Parkway Public Highway Authority, formed in 2008 by Arvada, Broomfield and Jefferson County, is pursuing private investors to make proposals to build the initial stretch of tollway from CO 128 near the Jefferson County Airport to CO 93.

It is currently working to get the toll road added to the metro area’s 2035 Regional Transportation Plan maintained by the Denver Regional Council of Governments.

You can read the application for that designation here.

Parkway proponents say they encourage improvements on CO 93 as well, even thought hat’s not part of their project.

“To the extent they can get funding to fix their road through Golden, we’ll be there to help them, but it doesn’t sound like that’s what this is all about,” said Preston Gibson, president of the Jefferson Economic Council.

“We’d love to help them get money to fix it. But there isn’t any money. I don’t know exactly how they’ll come up with this additional money.”

But Gibson said the parkway’s study shows an impact opposite of what Golden and Boulder claim.

“It only makes sense that if you provide an additional route for people to use, it will lessen traffic on Indiana and other regional roads. “They just need to paint the worst picture possible for their residents.”

Opponents say the toll road is predicated on keeping conditions congested and slow on the nearby arterial streets, particularly Indiana Street north of 96th Avenue. They said the parkway supporters want to “cripple” traffic on Indiana by lowering the speed limit to 30. It is currently 55 on the open rural highway segment north to CO 128.

McCasky said the parkway isn’t proposing the lower speed limit, but Putnam pointed out that the parkway application to DRCOG shows it made a request to model traffic forecasts for the 2035 “build” alternative based on reducing the speed limit on Indiana to 30 between CO 128 and 96th Avenue.

McCasky said future development will dictate lower speed limits through “traffic calming” devices such as roundabouts, and he noted Golden itself wants to lower the speed limit on U.S. 6 from 55 to 45 and uses traffic calming devices around the city.

Putnam said Golden wants to lower the speed on U.S. 6 to reduce noise.

“We call Indiana traffic crippling because dropping a rural road like that from 55 to 30 certainly doesn’t fall into the notion of traffic calming,” Putnam said. “This stretch of Indiana Street is totally rural.”

The DRCOG board is on track to decide on the parkway proposal at its Jan. 20 meeting.