[0:06] Hey, good morning everyone. Thanks for
coming to our Lake County Board of
[0:10] County Commissioners work session.
First item today's overview and
[0:14] discussion regarding transportation and
safety related issues on state highways
[0:19] in Lake County. The topics today
include, but are not limited to, Highway
[0:24] 91 safety, Homestake Trout Club and
other private property access on Highway
[0:30] 24, semi-truck deliveries in Grand View
West, and 2026 pavement and pothole
[0:38] repair schedule.
This is led by Josh Becker, our deputy
[0:42] county manager, staff, and Ced.
>> Hey, ready to kick things off. So, uh,
[0:49] this work session is a combination of a
a number of things that are all traffic,
[0:52] transportation, and safety related. Um,
we've had commissioner, um, level
[0:57] requests to discuss some issues. Um,
we've had some some citizen, um,
[1:01] outreach, you know, requests on certain
safety issues on on various county
[1:05] roads. So, we sort of packaged all of
this together into one discussion where
[1:09] we can focus on transportation and
safety throughout the county. Um, and
[1:14] yeah, this again, this is not limited
necessarily to the topics on hand. So
[1:18] whatever the commissioners would like to
discuss, we have folks on the room who
[1:21] can assist um from C do from our staff
as well as members of public to discuss
[1:26] specific issues. So we do recognize that
our C dot staff can only stay with us
[1:30] for a short time. So we're going to
start with the highway 91 topic and this
[1:34] stems from a request from Commissioner
Tharp about conversation we had at the
[1:38] COT update about a month ago now um to
discuss uh general um potential safety
[1:44] improvements for Highway 91.
starting point.
[1:48] » Yeah,
>> welcome back.
[1:49] » Hi.
>> Hi.
[1:50] » Glad to be here. This is my colleague
Mark Bunnel. Mark is kind of our lead
[1:54] safety guy in the office there. So
>> awesome.
[1:59] » So what can we do? How do we make
Highway 91 safer?
[2:05] » Actually, I drove
>> I live on mile marker 4 and I did have
[2:11] one suggestion. Uh is the S turn mile
marker 2. There's three homes there and
[2:17] I don't know if if we could use a guard
rail there because people get a big head
[2:23] of speed and then they hit that S turn
and that's where they lose it. And uh I
[2:27] know there's at least one person that
lives in one of those three homes that's
[2:31] really tired of having people come in at
100 miles an hour. So I don't know if
[2:37] you guys could think about doing a a
guardrail just in the S turn. So, one of
[2:42] the things we we talked about as kind of
an initial solution there would be to to
[2:46] place chevron signs. So, I don't think
we have those on that curve there right
[2:51] now. And so, that was probably that's
kind of an easier sort of quicker fix
[2:56] that we can do as opposed to guardrail,
which
[2:59] » I see.
>> It's a whole process. So, um I think
[3:02] » chevron.
>> So, chevrons are the signs. Yeah,
[3:05] exactly like that. They're you see them
on some curbs and so they're they're
[3:08] kind of square like this. They're black
and yellow and they have the a kind of
[3:13] schematic arrows in them.
>> Turning
[3:16] » reflector.
>> Yeah. Yeah. Reflectors. Absolutely. Mhm.
[3:20] » And so that was a thought there. Um we
could put them for both directions. Um
[3:24] so it' probably be a series of maybe
three or four signs, something like that
[3:28] that that might at least just draw some
more attention to the curve there cuz um
[3:33] you know, we we have looked at some of
the accident data right there and there
[3:37] have been a few cars that have gone off
there. Um, I wouldn't say the number was
[3:41] was huge, but there have been a few. So,
um, that's that's kind of what we're
[3:46] looking at at the at the moment.
>> Okay.
[3:48] » What about um mile marker? It looked
like 11 and 12 get dinged a lot on the
[3:55] stats that were sent
and then between 6 and 12 and 8.
[4:02] » Those look like hot spots based on your
>> statistics. Are you able to put that in?
[4:10] or or what we sent or what was sent to
them.
[4:16] » We're trying to get on Wi-Fi here so we
can
[4:18] » Oh, yeah. So, do you see there's the
>> or or if you have or if you have the
[4:22] information that we sent, we can look it
in.
[4:25] » Yeah. Can we
>> pull that up?
[4:27] » Candace, can you just It's my computer.
>> Can we go to teams and pull up the stats
[4:33] from today's session?
I don't think they'll ever sent it to me
[4:39] from C dot.
>> You'll have to send them to the VOCC
[4:42] room in an email.
>> No, they're in the packet.
[4:45] » Are they?
>> They're in a folder that highway
[4:47] incident data 2026, 2025, and 2024
>> or who is that?
[4:51] » Oh, is that from Dan Dailyaly?
>> Yes.
[4:53] » Oh, sorry. That's from Dan.
>> Yeah. So, it's under the fire up. There
[4:56] you go.
>> Okay. Sorry. I was not sure what you
[4:58] wanted here.
>> I wasn't sure.
[5:00] » Which one you want me to pull up?
>> That's what I was referring to. Sorry.
[5:04] Gotcha.
um any one of them. It's the same. It
[5:08] looks really similar.
>> Okay. Well, I mean, they're all just
[5:11] different years in it. I wanted the
specific.
[5:14] » Okay.
>> So, 6.5 to to 8 were showing up a lot.
[5:18] And then or mile marker 6.5 to 8 and
then mile marker 11 and 12 if you look
[5:25] at other years as well.
You want to pull up maybe another ear
[5:29] because this doesn't have that many.
[5:35] I can talk about those
>> great. Yeah.
[5:40] » So, at the county line, what happens is
um the winding blows the snow over the
[5:48] the bridge right there and it becomes
white out conditions. So, we have a lot
[5:54] of either head-on collisions or just
people not being able to see at all. And
[6:00] um we have a lot of accidents there.
the area just past climax that you're
[6:06] coming down the hill for whatever reason
that that roadway becomes a sheet of ice
[6:12] but over the years it has gotten better.
Uh I think that that's one of se dots is
[6:17] on your radar uh because we've had
multiple uh vehicle pileups right there.
[6:24] The other concern is where we've had a
lot of head-on collisions as well. And
[6:29] that's going down from uh it's right by
Chalk Creek right there where it's mile
[6:35] marker. Then you see the statistics
there. It's mile marker between seven
[6:41] and nine.
>> Mhm.
[6:43] » That's where it splits into the passing
lane.
[6:45] » That's correct.
>> Yeah. So many there.
[6:47] » One of you know you know that's a
problem. Maybe a solution on that one
[6:51] would be a guard rail because they go
over the edge right there and we've done
[6:55] over the edge rescues
>> with them going over but also I believe
[6:59] that that's a passing lane as well.
>> And so if it became a non-passing lane I
[7:05] don't know if people would
abide by that but at least it's a safety
[7:10] measure that might be able to put in
place. Um the other it was mentioned the
[7:16] actual mile marker six which is the
corner.
[7:19] » Uh I don't know if that one has
>> the signs that you talking about the
[7:24] chevron chevron signs but mile marker
six all another problem for us and then
[7:31] and then uh commissioner you brought it
up mall marker between two and three uh
[7:36] on those corners there. So those are our
our
[7:41] areas on Highway 91 that we respond the
most on whether it's non-injury or we're
[7:46] doing auto extrication or we're doing
over the edge or it's major injuries and
[7:50] deaths.
>> So at the in the 7 to9 area you said
[7:55] that there were there were issues with
people going off the road but also with
[8:01] head-ons at the same time there.
>> That's correct. We either we either have
[8:04] head-on collisions there or the accident
is so bad and vehicles end up over the
[8:11] edge.
>> Okay.
[8:13] » And is that that's typically when it's
icy out?
[8:15] » It's when it's normally when it's icy.
>> But when it's non icy, we had vehicles
[8:22] go over the edge as well because of the
accident itself. We've had motorcycles
[8:26] go over the edge
>> right there um during that summer.
[8:31] » Yeah.
used to be a problem area.
[8:36] We got a lot of people that are coming
out of Jo Creek during the winter which
[8:40] which creates an additional issue but
because they snowmobile up there
[8:46] during the summer that's a great area
[8:52] popular area on the hillside that's very
sideline
[8:58] going to the east
[9:04] corner just before you
to that.
[9:09] » I know three people directly who have
gone off that edge um just in in the
[9:15] time that I've been here. And I think
the excessive speeds right there are one
[9:19] of the biggest contributing factor since
that's a massive downhill and that's
[9:24] where people who have cars that aren't
even that fast. It's the only spot where
[9:29] they can pick up speed to make dangerous
passes when they're in a hurry. That's
[9:34] uh as someone who's made that commute
thousands of times over the last 28
[9:38] years, that is probably the scariest
spot for people driving dangerously
[9:44] that big hill.
>> Yeah, absolutely.
[9:49] » So, could it be pulled up on a map so we
can make sure on the exact curve that
[9:55] you're talking
[10:07] It's not cooperating.
That tells me it's connected.
[10:18] » Maybe Google maps it.
>> Mhm.
[10:29] Little mousy mouse. Here's
[10:46] Shot Creek.
>> Okay. Oh, so it's on the It's on the
[10:52] west side of
>> Yeah. And then this is high. This is
[10:55] like a massive embankment. So, you go
straight down off the highway here and
[11:00] then you go straight up
the hillside there.
[11:05] Right. That's what we're talking about.
>> Mhm.
[11:07] » And this is where it becomes a passing
lane.
[11:10] » That's where the climbing lane's at.
>> Yeah.
[11:13] » Right at the start of the climbing lane.
>> Yep. And
[11:16] » that's where people try and pass coming
downhill,
[11:19] » right?
>> It used to be a passing
[11:21] » It did. They closed it up
>> and then now it's too solid yellow,
[11:24] which if you've lived here long enough,
you can just disregard that.
[11:29] Go on the old
>> Well, I I think I think I had a meeting
[11:33] very similar to this many years ago
where we decided to do that.
[11:37] » Yeah. I remember.
>> So, yes.
[11:40] » Well, and the state legislature just
passed a law that increased potential
[11:44] fines for crossing on a double yellow.
>> Yeah.
[11:48] » Right there. But this is so many head-on
collisions here, right?
[11:52] » That's correct.
>> So many. I mean, we all know people who
[11:54] have
been in significant life-changing
[11:58] accidents here.
>> Yeah.
[12:01] » And then I also think where is mile what
is this mile marker, Dan?
[12:06] » Six.
>> This is the This is nuts here. I'm
[12:11] astounded we don't have more, but I've
seen countless accidents of people
[12:15] coming
southbound and there's a there's a
[12:20] double or there's a do dashed yellow
here and they try to make the pass going
[12:26] up this way before this turn.
>> That's correct.
[12:29] » And people here come off the road to try
to avoid a head-on collision. So, and no
[12:35] matter what the time of year is, you see
that dry, you see that wet. Is that
[12:42] » Can you screen share? Sorry.
>> Sorry, Andy.
[12:47] » No, it's okay. I just want to I want to
be able to know what you're you're
[12:51] pointing out over there.
>> I'm talking about this area here. The
[12:55] big the big curve.
>> The first big curve as you're coming
[12:58] down the straightaway.
>> Oh, yeah. There's always cars in the
[13:02] ditch there. It always cares right here
because they're avoiding a head-on
[13:05] collision from people passing going
northbound.
[13:08] » Does anyone get the feeling that that is
an emergency like oh no because of
[13:13] people pulling in and out of high
country?
[13:18] » I've seen people I have been a witness
to accidents here where it was a
[13:22] head-on. They were avoiding a head-on
personally,
[13:26] » but that's just anecdotal. Is there
signage at the base of that area that
[13:30] says that there is a passing lane
coming? Because I think part of that is
[13:34] people are trying to pass, not maybe not
necessarily knowing that there's, you
[13:38] know, a two-lane climbing lane a mile up
the road. So,
[13:42] » no, everybody knows. This is like locals
doing.
[13:44] » These are local.
>> This is not
[13:46] » local indie car drivers. But I guess
with the I mean what do you think that
[13:50] would do any mitigation is if we had a
like passing lane ahead sign you know
[13:55] people can pull off the gas for for a
mile and then wait till that climbing
[13:59] lane comes. So, we are looking at doing
that um kind of actually as the whole
[14:05] region goes and we're starting with
Highway 40 because there's a lot of
[14:08] passing lanes up there and but we're
going to migrate that down here. But I
[14:12] would probably agree that it's probably
mostly locals that that know that.
[14:16] » Yep.
>> They're just comfortable and so they're
[14:18] doing what they think they can do.
>> It's our commuters. Like it's so many of
[14:22] us just know it really well. Mhm.
>> To just clarify, you're talking about
[14:28] like the signs that say next passing
lane 2 miles.
[14:32] » Yeah. You know, thousand feet or
whatever and you see them on other
[14:35] highways. I'm just curious. I don't
recall if there's one up there. But
[14:38] » I I'm going to guess not, but I'm not
100% sure.
[14:42] » Cuz people could be trying to make that
pass because they know it's very short,
[14:46] you know, passing zone, not realizing
>> trying to get a jump on it.
[14:49] » Exactly. Well, the passing lane isn't
until Chalk Creek mile marker 11.
[14:56] » Seven.
>> Oh, it's seven. Okay. Okay.
[15:00] » Sweet. So, that wouldn't be more than a
mile.
[15:02] » Mile or so.
>> I'm just saying if it said like it was
[15:06] four miles, that would make you want to
do it more.
[15:08] » Sure.
>> I'm not waiting four minutes to pass
[15:13] this person.
>> I have a second question. And uh I'm not
[15:17] I know this is super contentious, but
what's your guys' experience with
[15:22] cameras and speeding tickets? I know
flock is a huge issue, but
[15:28] » maybe you want to speak to that a little
bit.
[15:31] » So there is the ability to put speed
cameras pretty much anywhere on on state
[15:37] highways now due to the legislation that
came into effect actually August 1st
[15:41] » and some previous legislation. But um we
have three areas in the region where we
[15:47] have photo enforcement and they're all
three in towns. We have them in
[15:50] Glennwood, we have them in
Vale, we have them in
[15:57] have them in Basalt pretty soon here.
>> There might be a third one. But um
[16:02] » were those real contentious? Did you
have to go through the local community
[16:06] or is that your
>> Well, so the local community, the local
[16:08] sheriff's led those efforts. So, it's
it's kind of one where C do DOT's not
[16:13] really pushing it or we're kind of
impartial to it is what our position is.
[16:18] So, if if you wanted to do that, um,
basically what would happen is we would
[16:22] work with the sheriff. They would put
together basically an application and
[16:27] that would would go through us and also
state patrol to be signed off on and
[16:31] then that system would be out there. So,
I would say in an area like this
[16:37] it would be a little bit unusual. I
mean, they're usually mostly in urban
[16:41] kind of areas. Um, not that it couldn't
be done out here. It's a possibility as
[16:45] long as there was things like power and
communications and some of that kind of
[16:48] stuff on the technical side.
>> Um, but um,
[16:53] any place that there's a lot of
speeding, they they can be put up. Part
[16:56] of the justification in the application
is citing by how many citations you've
[17:02] given, what kind of speeds people are
generally traveling. You know, it asks
[17:05] for some actual data like that. Um,
>> but if all that is, you know,
[17:08] substantiates the need for cameras, then
then it could be done for sure.
[17:13] » I can imagine that being real
contentious. And I could also imagine if
[17:17] there was a sign that said, "Hey,
there's there's a camera coming up,
[17:21] every single person would slow down."
>> Yeah. I don't know. I'm just saying that
[17:26] » that's a can of worms for you. Like some
some retail spots have like a you're
[17:31] smile you're on camera and then it's a
fake camera,
[17:34] » but it's still a deterrent.
>> Mhm. Is that allowed?
[17:38] » It wouldn't be effective.
The word would get out.
[17:45] » A quick question on that. Would it
require a camera for each direction?
[17:50] Like one for the people heading towards
Leadville and one for people drive. Not
[17:55] that people will be speeding as much
uphill, but it is still pretty wild
[18:01] watching people make three wide passes
up there into oncoming traffic. But does
[18:06] that require two two cameras or does one
camera check both uh all traffic
[18:13] » there? There's there would be a separate
camera for each direction.
[18:17] For one thing, they want to try to get
uh license plates on both ends. So, it's
[18:22] both cameras doing enforcement for both
directions.
[18:27] » And so, so I I haven't really dug too
much into how some of the communities
[18:31] have done this, but my understanding is
that they essentially hire a vendor to
[18:35] come out and design and install the
system and then the vendor is paid
[18:40] through some of the revenue that's
generated. And it generally works out to
[18:44] be sort of a revenueish
neutralish to the community. So, it's
[18:48] really not something that that that
makes money or costs money. It's it's
[18:53] typically something neutral
>> and that's generally born, like I say,
[18:56] by a third party.
>> Okay.
[18:58] » So, um if you start if you want to think
about that either either here or
[19:02] anywhere, um just know that that's kind
of usually how those deals work.
[19:07] » Wow, that's contentious. I know people
are cutting them down.
[19:12] » Yeah. Well, and and to separate that
issue out, Flock is reading license
[19:17] plates going into a database.
While this is also reading license
[19:21] plates, they're they're separate
systems.
[19:24] » Oh, I see.
>> That's you know, Flock is a nationwide
[19:26] thing, nationwide database. These speed
cameras are the one location and they're
[19:33] not being paired with other things
around.
[19:36] » And and these cameras don't even take a
picture of the driver because the driver
[19:40] is irrelevant,
>> right? So that those are all subtleties
[19:44] to the cameras out there on the side of
the road that probably most people may
[19:48] not even believe exist.
>> No, I'm familiar with it because I got a
[19:51] ticket, but my daughter was in Denver.
She crossed into the the HOV lane.
[19:57] » Okay. Just crossed in and crossed back
out. That cost me 100 bucks.
[20:01] » Thanks. Some people pay it.
>> So reiterating and making this crystal
[20:06] clear for anyone who watches this later
on recording or whatevers. Traffic
[20:11] cameras are not flock cameras. This is
correct, right?
[20:15] » That's correct.
>> Okay.
[20:18] » It's important to make the distinction
though when we're signing a contract
[20:22] applying for it.
>> Yes.
[20:24] » So going back to another thing you
mentioned is, you know, there is a
[20:29] requirement to inform drivers that
camera speed enforcement ahead.
[20:33] » Yeah. because it's it's intended to be a
safety mechanism to get people to slow
[20:39] down. It is not to catch people and find
them and and generate revenue. So there
[20:46] are advanced signs that are required as
part of the deal.
[20:49] » I mean I hate to be the one that history
will look back on and say, "Oh yeah,
[20:53] Bullock wanted flock cameras and then
but we could change the highway all day
[20:58] long. It's really about changing
people's behavior and people aren't
[21:03] gonna
they're just not going to change their
[21:06] behavior unless there's some teeth. So,
>> well, wait. Do you want plot cameras?
[21:12] » Well, they're not plot cameras. They're
traffic cameras.
[21:15] » I feel like you've made a distinction
has been made. Don't worry.
[21:18] » I don't know. I'm not saying I want it.
Hope I'm making that clear. I don't not
[21:21] saying I want it, but seems like an
important part of the
[21:26] » You know, you know how like um Oh, I'm
sorry, Matt. Go ahead.
[21:30] » I think it would work. I think it's a
solution that could be explored.
[21:36] » Go ahead, Andy.
>> Um, other deterrents that I think are
[21:40] statistically proven to work are just
the sign that has the little blue and
[21:44] red flashing lights on it when you're
going too fast and how those like sub
[21:49] just those lights on the on the sign
subconsciously affect people to the
[21:53] level where they are it's shown that
they will slow down. Um, I don't know if
[21:59] that's something. It's sort of like that
um uh officer Manny Quinn down in Twin
[22:04] Lakes.
>> Do we have any old old uh cop cars
[22:09] laying around that we can just post up
there and see if that makes a difference
[22:12] in the meantime?
>> I I would think that works once and then
[22:16] the locals
>> say, "Oh, that's just for the tourists.
[22:20] It
>> doesn't apply to locals."
[22:22] » I don't know, man. I still slow way down
when I get into Twin Lakes. Anytime I
[22:27] see that car sitting there, I know it's
empty. I know there's nothing in there,
[22:30] but I still slow way down. It just
reminds you like, "Oh, yeah, that's
[22:34] right.
>> This is a spot."
[22:37] » I didn't know there was an actual name
for the officer. I know the officer.
[22:41] That's
>> well respected in the community.
[22:45] » So, okay, let's get this process
straight. In order to Let's use the
[22:50] cameras.
In order to get the cameras installed,
[22:54] we would have to go work with our
sheriff
[22:57] to fill out an application to see DOT.
>> Correct.
[23:02] » Okay. And then that in that application,
we have to provide statistics
[23:08] and based on the statistics that um Dan
Dailyaly has provided us with, what what
[23:14] more do we need than this kind of
>> so so the main thing is is speed
[23:19] statistics. And so,
>> okay,
[23:21] » so in my and I I'm speaking a little bit
out of tone. I'm not 100% because I
[23:26] haven't gone through the process. I've
just reviewed what I've seen, but um
[23:30] there's a requirement for a speed study.
>> And so what that entails is it is
[23:34] entails either going out there with
radar guns or some type of speed
[23:38] detecting device and showing that X
percentage of of drivers are exceeding
[23:44] the speed limit by a certain amount. So
you can draw then some conclusions
[23:48] between okay we've got it signed at 65
55
[23:54] 80% of the people are going 10 miles an
hour over there or something like that.
[23:58] So there's conclusions like that that
have to be drawn. I believe the vendors
[24:02] provide those speed studies as part of
their services but I'm not 100% sure on
[24:07] that. So most of the information most of
the data is is directly speed related
[24:13] rather than accident related.
Okay,
[24:17] » if that makes sense. Yeah,
>> it does. It does and it doesn't. So,
[24:22] what is our avenue to create any
enforcement or like signage
[24:29] when it comes to accidents?
Like an accident doesn't have to be
[24:33] speed related,
>> right?
[24:34] » It can be just reckless driving related.
So, how do we get any of the signage
[24:40] we've talked about or any of the traffic
measures we've talked about?
[24:44] So
>> like the sign like the chevrons, how do
[24:47] we get those?
>> Um so so even for chevrons uh we we have
[24:53] um standards that we look at basically
say you know you should experience x
[24:59] number of accidents related to these
signs over a certain time period and if
[25:04] those thresholds are met with some a
little bit of discretion in there then
[25:08] we can we can place those signs up. So
that is that is little more than a
[25:14] request to us to say hey can you take a
look at this
[25:17] » we if you have in incident data that you
can provide that's helpful um because
[25:22] the accident data that we use in our
database is doesn't include incidents it
[25:27] only includes something where an officer
was on scene and and filled out a report
[25:32] there. So it doesn't include counter
reports or some of the other kind of
[25:36] things that go out there. So our our
data is not necessarily totally
[25:41] complete, but it's also very clean if
you understand the sort of boundaries of
[25:46] what it's for.
>> So So we can audit these locations
[25:49] ourselves. I was hoping we might be able
to do it right here in front of you, but
[25:53] we're struggling with this.
>> Sorry.
[25:57] » Do you want to email us anything?
>> Um,
[25:59] » we can I can't even connect. Yeah.
>> Otherwise, I would patch into our crash
[26:03] database and be
>> pulling this what we're seeing on our
[26:08] » kind of what we'd hoped, but
>> sorry.
[26:10] » That's all right.
>> Do you have an HDMI? You could maybe you
[26:13] could just plug you in.
>> Actually, I don't know if we could
[26:17] maintain the zoom
>> to go to that level at this point. So,
[26:20] » I mean, you sent us an email just as as
a formal request. Please look at these
[26:26] curves for us,
>> okay? and we'll take it from there,
[26:29] which then means that
um if we get to that point, then CEO
[26:34] just installs them.
>> Okay.
[26:38] » Yeah. So, that's for signs like chevron
signs. Um if there was
[26:44] other types of warning signs out there
that that seemed appropriate like an
[26:49] intersection ahead sign or I don't
whatever. Okay.
[26:53] » Um the passing line or passing signs,
those kinds of things. Um other signs
[26:57] like the radar feedback signs like um he
was saying online there um that you know
[27:03] show your speed and things like that.
Those signs are not necessarily
[27:07] something that seed dot would provide.
Those would be something that we would
[27:10] ask you guys to permit and then put up
out there. Um
[27:14] » sorry for the radar.
>> For the radar no for the radar feedback
[27:18] signs. So he was saying the signs that
you know they say speed limit 55 your
[27:23] speed is whatever they have flashing
lights and then they have you know they
[27:27] say slow down or they flash or whatever.
>> Yeah.
[27:30] » So we
>> those would be signs the seat would not
[27:33] provide but we would allow those if if
they made sense in a certain area.
[27:37] » Okay.
>> Like you've probably seen the ones in
[27:40] turn. Some intern got permission got a
permit from Ced to install that and then
[27:47] they essentially own and maintain that
device on the highway.
[27:51] » Okay.
>> What are those called?
[27:53] » Radar feedback.
>> Radar feedback
[27:56] » or speed feedback signs.
>> We have one going into town.
[28:00] » We have several.
>> I was going to say don't I think you
[28:02] have one on the south end, right?
>> Yeah.
[28:06] » And Twin Lakes. Twin Lakes
>> and coming into town
[28:10] » that way
>> where it goes from 35 to 25
[28:12] » on 24 out by Mountain East and West
coming into that area.
[28:17] » The one coming in from Escandido is
out,000
[28:21] to fix it.
>> Oh, not right now.
[28:24] » That's a good one though. That's
>> also we were told that can't flash.
[28:28] » Yeah,
>> that's correct. Yeah.
[28:31] » Okay. There's strict requirements in the
national regulations on signage that
[28:37] » they have to follow
>> at least on the highway.
[28:41] » Technically, I can't do it in the county
either.
[28:44] » We're not going to patrol the county.
That's your on state highways. Yeah.
[28:50] » Can I ask can I ask a question about the
um uh the speed studies?
[28:57] » Yeah.
Um, how how do you get those to
[29:03] um reflect accurately like how fast
people are going? Like is it like is
[29:10] there someone out there with a a a radar
gun or is it on a tripod right there?
[29:16] Because you know, like from a from a
driver's perspective, when you see
[29:20] something like that set up, you're
you're going to slow down.
[29:25] » Yeah. So, there's there's two ways that
it's done. Um, the the original way is
[29:31] somebody would go out there with a radar
gun in a non-conspicuous looking car and
[29:36] try to just find a place where they can
pull off on the side of the road and
[29:40] sort of blend in and they would take the
counts. Now, what we've been doing for
[29:46] most of our studies recently is we have
these devices that we go out there and
[29:50] we just band them to a signpost and we
leave them for a week
[29:54] » and we come back and get the data. So,
they blend right in. Um, you can't
[29:59] hardly tell that they're there if you're
not looking.
[30:01] » They're accurate. And so, that's kind of
the way we've been doing it lately.
[30:06] » Great. Thank you.
>> How many of those can we do
[30:10] » at a time?
many as we have.
[30:14] » I'm just wondering to like be able to
like kind of heat map the speeds of
[30:18] Highway 91,
not knowing where the speed is,
[30:23] » right?
>> Is contributing
[30:26] to the crash that might be later on.
Just wondering.
[30:30] » So, so what we do if we're going to do
like a corridor like this is we would
[30:33] take a look at it and go, okay, where do
characteristics of the highway change?
[30:37] » Okay. So, as we near, for instance, a
curve that we know is rated at a lower
[30:42] speed than the speed limit, we might put
one right there. Um, you know, so I
[30:47] mean, there's there's there's kind of a
kind of an art to where you would place
[30:51] them. Um, but that's one of the nice
things about not having to have people
[30:54] out there with guns is you can put three
of them up and just come back and and
[30:59] you have all the information. So,
>> it's like a wildlife camera.
[31:03] » Yeah, it's kind of like that.
>> Okay.
[31:06] How do we how do we ask for that?
[31:11] » Well, go ahead.
>> Well, so that's that's something that
[31:14] you would do on your own.
>> Oh, we do it.
[31:17] » Are you talking about for speed cameras
or for just in general
[31:21] » in general to study the speeds, not for
cameras, but just to understand
[31:26] » just to understand what the speed of
>> Yeah. So that because it's lots of
[31:30] contributing factors to such a
complicated roadway, right? and to such
[31:36] varied accidents in different places.
Just how do we ask for that to compile
[31:41] the whole picture?
>> So everything that's out there is a
[31:44] compilation of past efforts that have
done exactly all of this.
[31:47] » Yeah. And so
[31:51] unless something has drastically
changed, we would have to we would want
[31:56] to really identify why we would go take
another look at it or in what areas we
[32:00] would take a look because of because of
some change like what is different now
[32:04] than when we did the last speed study.
And I don't know when the last speed
[32:08] study was done,
>> right?
[32:09] » Um it might have been several years. Um
it's possible. Um, I will tell you from
[32:14] experience that, um, you know, when we
when we have sign when we have speed
[32:20] limits out there that have been out
there for years and years and we go back
[32:23] and take a look at them, very rarely do
they ever change unless there is
[32:27] something like I'm saying like a a big
intersection that's gone in because of a
[32:32] development or something's being
realigned in the highway or something
[32:36] pretty drastic usually. Otherwise, it's
unlikely that it's going to really
[32:40] change any.
[32:45] to to your point about doing I mean
you're talking about looking at the
[32:50] entire corridor and where are the
speeding problems is that what you're
[32:54] trying to identify.
>> I think that the the outcome that we're
[32:58] seeing is really
fatal or drastic accidents
[33:04] » and if not then like near misses almost
every time you go over. So, high
[33:10] exposure to those fatal accidents.
So,
[33:16] so how do we look at all of the
potential
[33:20] causes to find the root cause that we
need to tweak to actually change that
[33:26] outcome? And if there's a different way
to do it, great. But I'm just I'm just
[33:32] wondering like yes, I know that a lot of
work has been done to make it the way it
[33:35] is,
>> but we're still seeing incredibly
[33:37] dangerous driving there.
So, so what is the next step by looking
[33:43] at the hole and not being like, well,
you know, state patrol does this and see
[33:48] that does that. How do we as
commissioners get enough information to
[33:51] look at the hole so we can ask the right
person to change the thing that needs to
[33:55] be changed? Does that
>> make sense of what I'm asking?
[33:58] » Yeah. So, so there's
>> two components. One, we've got the
[34:03] physical highway and two, we've got
driver behavior,
[34:06] » right? And
I would say there's nothing out there
[34:10] inherently
wrong or dangerous about the highway,
[34:14] but it's how the drivers interact with
that that then can become a problem. So
[34:18] » we've speeding is one of those driver
behaviors
[34:22] » that the state legislature has given the
tool to do speed enforcement canvas
[34:27] » that you can do that. And so there's a
part of if you were to map the corridor,
[34:33] you know, where people are speeding the
most prevalent and then target that with
[34:37] cameras. Then you got the other aspect
of where are people
[34:42] making poor choices in their driver
behavior that are then also contributing
[34:47] to crashes and how do you specifically
target
[34:50] » that? Yes.
>> Yes.
[34:53] » Okay.
>> There's there's those three things.
[34:57] You've got the driver behavior of
speeding, driver behavior of other risky
[35:00] maneuvers,
>> and then how does the highway interact
[35:03] with those two things,
>> right?
[35:05] » And so I think it's a matter of, you
know, looking at the crash data, the
[35:10] experience of those that are seeing it,
responding it, and what could be done to
[35:15] address that behavior.
>> And then you target the speed cameras
[35:20] where it makes the most sense. If you
can target
[35:23] a handful of locations, will that bring
the speed down elsewhere?
[35:27] » Right.
>> Don't know,
[35:29] » right?
>> Or is it that you know that the whole
[35:31] thought about speed bumps when you play
speed bumps, people slow down to go over
[35:35] the bump and what do they do between the
next bump?
[35:37] » They go faster.
>> They go faster. So if they see the
[35:40] camera, are they going to speed up
between that the next one?
[35:43] » Right?
>> Don't know if that's the case.
[35:45] » We haven't had enough data to know on
that yet. But
[35:49] » those are those are the three areas that
I think you're talking about focusing
[35:52] on. Yes.
>> Just to separate that.
[35:54] » Thank you.
>> So this would be a thing where the
[35:58] county
comes up with this effort to study and
[36:03] figure out where the speeding problems
are occurring, where are those behaviors
[36:06] occurring? And then we work together to
see what SE do on the highway and what
[36:11] can you do on the behavior side
>> from the county's perspective. And then
[36:16] what can state patrol do to to work on
that behavior also?
[36:20] » Okay.
>> Does anyone know offhand like the
[36:23] regulations around sign placement for
speed cameras? Not flock cameras, speed
[36:30] cameras.
How how like if you could put the signs
[36:34] 3 miles, 6 miles, whatever out, that
would contribute to people slowing down
[36:41] ahead of time and you get maybe get more
bang for your buck out of something like
[36:44] that. Does anyone know how far out you
can put signs for that?
[36:51] » It's a good question.
>> Yeah, I'm not 100% sure what the
[36:55] distances are. I I know that there are
there are specified distances in where
[37:02] the the warning signs has to be because
I think I think there has to be two of
[37:05] them. Um I think they have to be
explicit. I think they have to you know
[37:10] there's already a layout of what the
sign has to look like. Um I want to say
[37:15] that the distance in front of the
cameras is more like a quarter mile.
[37:21] it's pretty close and it depends on the
speed limit that's out there as to how
[37:25] far you would put it,
>> right?
[37:27] » Um, so those are all kind of part of the
applications and stuff. So I I can't
[37:32] necessarily tell you off the top of my
head, but um I mean the the corridors I
[37:37] I believe can be fairly long. Um, you
know, I know the one that they have on
[37:43] 93 in Denver, I think it's for several
miles. Um, even though a lot of the ones
[37:47] that we have in the region currently are
are very short. They're usually like
[37:51] quarter mile, but they're downtown kind
of things. So,
[37:54] » okay.
>> Um, it'd be breaking a little bit of new
[37:58] territory for, you know, a rural
application like this, but it's within
[38:02] the realm.
>> We're pioneers up here.
[38:05] » Yeah.
[38:08] » Okay. So, regardless to in order to find
out where there are high speeds, we need
[38:14] to do a speed study.
And
[38:18] who we ask to do that is dependent on
whether we're going to put cameras up.
[38:23] » Probably it's an option to go through
one of those vendors. Um there are other
[38:29] traffic consultants out there that have
the equipments and can put up the units
[38:34] and measure it for you.
>> Okay. what what he was talking about,
[38:37] you know, they're they're nicknamed a
sidefire radar because it's a it's set
[38:42] to the side of the highway, fires the
radar, and then collects the data. And
[38:48] there's a lot of folks in the Denver
area that have those that can compile
[38:53] the data,
collect and compile.
[38:58] » Okay.
And then in order to create the
[39:01] information about the
risky behavior, the drive responsible
[39:08] driving behaviors, that's where we would
work with our sheriff to determine like
[39:15] where these risky behaviors and
accidents are happening or how do we
[39:20] come when you split it up into three.
There was the speed, there was the risky
[39:25] driving behavior, and then there's how
the highway interacts with all of those
[39:28] things,
>> right?
[39:29] » So, how do we compile the information
for
[39:32] » So, it's a combination of the the crash
data that SE do has access to in
[39:38] conjunction with the other,
>> you know, incidents that aren't
[39:43] reported, but you know, that the locals
know about.
[39:47] You know, you talk the near misses
>> is is the category that, you know, how
[39:52] close was it to a crash, but it was a
risky maneuver, risky behavior, and so
[39:57] being able to compile that information
with the crash crash data to see what
[40:03] could be done. So, it's
>> okay,
[40:06] » COT, County Sheriff, State Patrol
getting together and saying, "These are
[40:11] the locations that we're seeing it.
We're checking the crash data and and
[40:15] putting that together. One of the things
to understand is there's, you know, we
[40:20] cover the entire region
for seed dots here. We have so many
[40:25] areas like this that unless there's
initiative on the county side.
[40:30] » We're not going to come in and do this
unless it's, you know, rises to the
[40:34] level within our crash data because we
have so many areas that are up there. So
[40:39] if you're taking the initiative and
bringing seed like you have today and
[40:42] you bring safe patrol together then more
is going to more likely
[40:48] get done.
>> That's what I thought. Awesome.
[40:52] Sweet. Um just a second Pete just uh had
one more question. So when it comes to
[40:58] like near misses, should we be asking
the public to call in near misses?
[41:03] Because otherwise how are we how would
anyone collect that data?
[41:09] Except anecdotally from county
commissioners
[41:12] » survey
>> survey. Yeah. Like have you seen how
[41:16] people have compiled that data
in the past
[41:22] » in in my work in this industry the term
near miss and focusing on it has only
[41:27] been in the last few years.
So
[41:31] » okay
>> survey those types of things would be a
[41:36] new frontier I would say. I think you
mentioned pioneering for this area and
[41:40] so it is an option to collect that
information to where are you seeing the
[41:44] issues out there where you seeing the
near misses put that on a map we overlay
[41:50] that with the crash data you know
there's some aspect of our people
[41:55] exaggerating so we have to understand
what they're telling us and how reliable
[42:01] is it and and what do we actually do
with that information is correct
[42:06] » some of the near I guess stuff that I
talk about is when we have issues with
[42:12] people running red lights, we will set
up cameras through a vendor will set up
[42:17] cameras for us and collect 24 hours
worth of video and then they're putting
[42:23] hard numbers to those near misses.
>> People run red lights, how close were
[42:27] the cars, you know, within feet or
within milliseconds, that kind of stuff
[42:31] to to an actual
>> near miss. this out on a rural county
[42:36] section on a state highway with the
higher speeds,
[42:39] » you know, we would not be able to put
those cameras up
[42:43] » to make any meaningful data out of that
kind of a near study.
[42:48] » Okay.
But maybe we could like if we had enough
[42:52] information from our community about
where they're experiencing new new
[42:55] misses and we put a camera up
>> and we do find something,
[43:00] wouldn't that be
>> could there be meaningful data from
[43:04] that?
>> Yes. I'm just saying that over a
[43:06] corridor of however many miles
>> trying to target the right spot,
[43:10] » right,
>> to to video near misses
[43:13] » to actually catch one. where that's why
he says we usually use do that kind of
[43:17] stuff in intersection because I mean
constantly all day there's near conflict
[43:21] so
>> that's kind of the
[43:24] » the main
>> the main use
[43:26] we did a high use crosswalk adjacent to
a ski area
[43:32] » uh for like 36 hours had over 300
potential near misses with pedestrians
[43:39] and when we say near miss that means it
wasn't like they were about to get hit
[43:43] but they were within the parameters
[43:48] or they didn't
like you
[43:54] on a county road, you know, like
>> Mhm.
[43:56] » say highway in the county is it may not
be beneficial and these are pretty
[44:01] pricey stuff. These are the typical
intersection for 24 hours is about 10
[44:04] grand.
>> Okay.
[44:06] » Wow,
>> cool. So going the route of asking you
[44:11] doing some sort of a survey to target
those areas where people seeing it and
[44:16] then that gives us a location or
locations a few locations to then focus
[44:21] our efforts and look at that might be
much better.
[44:25] » We can do that. I'm thinking a big map
with pins
[44:32] » sticky notes.
>> Yeah. And anybody who comes into the
[44:34] courthouse can put a pin where they've
had near messes.
[44:38] » Just spitball it.
>> That's cool.
[44:40] » Pioneering.
>> Can Can you set up an online map?
[44:44] » Could we do that
>> that people can go to a website, drop a
[44:49] pin,
>> and the explanation of
[44:54] what what they saw, what they
experienced.
[44:57] » I love this.
>> Let's go. Let's make the highway safer.
[45:03] Okay. I hear there's multi-steps. I hear
that it's multi- like
[45:08] » there is
>> agencies. So, so I I think a a good next
[45:12] step for us is um you know, like I said,
I apologize we can't pull up the data we
[45:18] sent you, but um we will take a look at
the data that we have in this area and I
[45:25] think we can do kind of a highle study
like we do in other areas and and
[45:31] identify hotspots, potential mitigations
kind of from our perspective. And if
[45:37] there's some information that you guys
can gain, whether it's from the near
[45:41] miss near miss stuff or or speed
information or whatever, you know, I
[45:46] think we can come together after that
and kind of maybe see where we land and
[45:50] maybe start to prioritize or look
deeper.
[45:53] » That'd be great.
>> I also hear loud and clear that if you
[45:56] change if you potentially change a
behavior in one area, you might be
[46:00] pushing
behavior to a different area and making
[46:04] it more risky. Totally hear that. So,
I'm just want to say I'm not being
[46:08] overly enthusiastic about changing the
highway. I'm being overly enthusiastic
[46:13] about collecting information
to be preventative and not make things
[46:18] worse.
>> Yeah.
[46:20] » Okay.
>> So, I mean along those lines, just
[46:24] you talked about guardrail on an S
curve. Well, could we target the
[46:30] behavior such that that guardrail is not
needed,
[46:33] » right? the chevrons versus the
guardrail. Right.
[46:37] » Right.
>> Yeah.
[46:38] » Yes. And so,
you know, when I look at the crash data
[46:43] and it's like, if we could eliminate no
drinking and driving, people wearing
[46:47] seat belts, how many fatal crashes would
go down,
[46:51] » right?
>> And that's not a highway thing. That's a
[46:54] behavior thing.
>> Totally.
[46:56] » There's so many behaviors that could be
targeted that will have way more impact
[47:02] than what we do on visible.
>> Yeah,
[47:06] » I think Highway 91 would need like an
alarm clock program then because
[47:12] » everyone's in a hurry to get to where
they left 10 minutes too late to go.
[47:17] » I was thinking the same thing, Andy.
>> You got to swing by the liquor store,
[47:23] the weed store before you jump on that
highway.
[47:30] » I didn't follow it, Matt. I'm sorry. I
know. I just didn't follow.
[47:35] » Would it be helpful if we shared with
the two of you the um the data from
[47:39] Chief Daily?
>> Absolutely.
[47:40] » About the incident.
>> Sure. Absolutely.
[47:42] » Maybe some other emails.
[47:48] » Absolutely.
Well, from y'all's perspective, what
[47:52] questions should we be asking or like
where do you think that we could be
[47:57] targeting more of our efforts to change
driver behavior
[48:04] as opposed to just working with C dot
and state troopers?
[48:11] » That's a tough question. That's
something that we don't do a whole lot.
[48:15] No, I'm just saying from your from your
experience and your p your position.
[48:19] » I I think any kind of of seasonal
campaigns are very helpful. Um, you
[48:25] know, we see that in some of the the
other areas where um,
[48:31] you know, they're just trying to get
messages out there on when snow, you
[48:36] know, early when early in the winter
time when seasons change. um you see
[48:40] things out there um when you know
there's going to be trick-or-treaters or
[48:44] events or things like that. Any kind of
local campaigns on what your safety
[48:50] folks are seeing or are expecting to
see. I think that's helpful. I know
[48:55] that's those are not always easy things
to do, but sometimes there's little
[48:58] things that can be done, but I think
promoting any of that kind of stuff at a
[49:02] local level is helpful.
>> Great.
[49:05] » Um you mentioned travel time. Yeah.
>> Where are most people coming from,
[49:11] commuting from, and then sitting down
and calculating, you know, what's the
[49:16] difference in 10 miles hour of a speed
limit versus going the speed limit?
[49:21] » And then, you know, is that extra is
that saved 5 minutes worth the risk
[49:27] » of a lifetime of, you know, someone
dying or,
[49:32] you know, injuries that you're dealing
with over a over a lifetime.
[49:36] » Yeah, that's a great idea.
do the math for them.
[49:40] » Yeah. And you know there's campaigns out
there, but if you target it specific to
[49:44] the drivers that you know are on 91, as
you've mentioned, the commuters that
[49:48] left 10 minutes late, well, is trying to
make up that 10 minutes worth the risk
[49:55] of what could occur?
>> Yeah.
[49:57] » And putting those messages out. I mean,
you know, C do DOT works with state
[50:02] patrol and we target the whole state,
but if you can target specific to the
[50:07] folks to and from this area, it'll be
more meaningful.
[50:15] » Pete D, you did you want to say
something?
[50:17] » I I did. Um, this is Pete. He's an
exparte member of board
[50:24] » from the community, representing the
community. Um,
[50:29] one thing that hasn't been discussed is
is active enforcement and maybe there's
[50:33] a reason for that. Um, you know, what
about tickets issued? Um, you know, by
[50:40] by officers on the on the road, you
know, where they were issued, what the
[50:45] speed limit was uh exceeded by, um,
tickets that were issued for passing in
[50:50] a no passing zone. It seems like you
know that's information that if there is
[50:57] enforcement
um should be should be available and
[51:00] should should be you know part of the
part of the data set and I don't I don't
[51:06] know what you know there must be
statistics on how many tickets have been
[51:09] issued you know on highway 91 in Lake
County for the you know per year and and
[51:16] then the the backup for that. You all
get that from the state troopers or just
[51:21] crashes?
>> We don't get that information though.
[51:24] » You don't get the tickets.
>> State patrol would have that information
[51:27] though. I'm sure your sheriff has a
contact there. I think they would
[51:31] provide that.
>> Yeah, we need to get lots of data from
[51:34] Heath.
>> He couldn't make it today. He really
[51:36] wanted to, but
>> we don't see much state patrol activity
[51:40] really.
>> And you know, Keith could be out there a
[51:44] little more too in my opinion. That
would that would help solve a lot if
[51:49] like a cameras stationary camera is one
thing once the word gets out like
[51:53] » look I got a ticket looks like I'm on
marker four then the word gets out
[51:57] whereas a sheriff's deputy could be
anywhere
[52:01] and the word would get out too like hey
I got a DUI on the way from work so
[52:07] that's a good point Pete one other
comment um you know there was discussion
[52:13] about how you know the where the passing
and no passing lanes, you know, where
[52:18] they are have changed over over time.
You know, it' be good to I'm sure there
[52:22] was good reason for changing it whenever
it was changed last time, you know, but
[52:26] maybe that could be re re-evaluated
because I think one of the issues other
[52:30] than speeding are people trying to pass
slow trucks, multiple slow trucks at a
[52:35] time. If there were if there were more
no more more passing lanes, legal
[52:40] passing lanes, then those might be, you
know, used preferentially to the to the
[52:46] illegal passing lanes. So So it seems
like that data ought to be available.
[52:51] You know, what's been changed over the
years in terms of where the passing and
[52:54] the passing zones are.
>> Yeah.
[53:02] Okay.
Thanks Pet.
[53:09] » Should we move on to Highway 24?
>> We should discuss it.
[53:15] » Yeah, absolutely. There's a couple
issues on Highway 24 and um for our CEO
[53:19] friends, it would be helpful to have you
here, but understand if your schedule
[53:22] requires you to step out.
>> Oh, we can stick around for a while
[53:25] longer.
>> Great. Great. Um so the next issue um to
[53:30] discuss from 91 to 24 uh is related to
some um some citizen concerns raised I
[53:36] think to a couple commissioners as well
as through public works u related to
[53:39] access into the home state trout club.
Uh so we just wanted to give a little
[53:43] bit of background. I think this issue
has has come up several times over the
[53:47] years. Michael has some background on
it. Um just related to you know what is
[53:51] the county road? what is possible at
that particular intersection given the
[53:55] the narrow entrance um which is
challenging for emergency vehicles as
[54:00] well as larger truck deliveries and
things but the limitations that exist
[54:04] related to the cattle guard etc. So, I
hope you don't mind. I'll hand that one
[54:08] to you.
>> Pull it up on mapure.
[54:18] » Let's over here.
[54:29] This friend is a cow guard right there.
>> So, this doesn't actually show where the
[54:33] C dot rideway do rightway. outside of
that. Um, that whole Gard is actually
[54:40] according to our property map is inside
the way. So, that was a gate to a ranch
[54:48] at one time.
Um, I'm not sure when the county took
[54:53] over county by 21, but it only goes
through the ranch to private property.
[54:59] Now, the private
property owner owns both sides of that
[55:03] on to the highway. Um
[55:09] it is narrow across the cattle guard. Um
there is coming down from the north side
[55:19] which is 24. That's actually the west
side.
[55:24] Um off the Tennessee Pass there's a
corner just before it gets to this
[55:28] intersection
right up there. You can leave the
[55:33] highway.
>> Okay.
[55:36] Sorry.
Catch up.
[55:40] Okay. Oops. You done?
>> That was really cool.
[55:46] Elastic.
>> Oh my goodness. Where is the curve?
[55:55] » You talking about this curve?
>> Yeah. That looks really gradual on the
[55:59] map, but in in reality, that feels a lot
sharper and blinder of a curve than it
[56:04] looks like right there.
>> Michael, which curve you talking about?
[56:09] » Um, yeah, it's coming down from that
way, but it's closer to the
[56:14] » this one. This big curve.
>> Yeah, right there.
[56:17] » Okay.
>> It's really It doesn't look like it. You
[56:19] don't have sight until you get around
that corner.
[56:23] Um, which kind of the problem with
traffic, you know, visibility.
[56:29] In my opinion, we need to This is
actually a pretty big project to just
[56:32] change out a co change out of Calgary.
[56:37] Um, for the county, we'd probably have
to get an online GPR because it's going
[56:40] to be really expensive
to probably put in a del lane and an XL
[56:47] lane out of that driveway or county road
onto Highway 24.
[56:53] Um, I know there's problems with traffic
turning into county, road 21 coming from
[56:58] the south or the east. um because you
stop in the lane, you have to wait for
[57:03] traffic to go by before you can turn.
Um you know, those are just some of the
[57:08] things that I've looked at out there
that were to change this, it would take
[57:13] a pretty big C do project to do that
C do involved project even if it's going
[57:19] to the permits and everything.
>> Is is there a way like I know ideally we
[57:27] could have the excel del lanes Um, and
you know, do this in a way that every it
[57:34] checks all the boxes, but like a lot of
things in local government, um, we were
[57:39] just touching on this this morning.
Sometimes seeking perfection means
[57:43] nothing ever gets done. And I know one
of the big issues these folks out here
[57:48] have is that if there's a fire, if
there's a medical emergency, if there's
[57:53] a a big truck delivery, they just can't
get in there easily. It's such a narrow
[57:58] entrance. So, uh, in the meantime, while
we're waiting for, you know, how to
[58:03] figure out how to do these bigger
projects, why why exactly can't we just
[58:08] widen the entrance?
[58:14] » Well, the thing is is it's not a
permitted CO entrance as it is. Um,
[58:20] » I because I've checked this without just
right away people. Um, it was never
[58:26] permitted. It wasn't a county run when
it was first put in. It was a driveway
[58:30] to a ranch. Um the county took it over
to make sure I believe to get people to
[58:35] the M state club cuz it ends at their
first property line. Um,
[58:44] » so you know, I don't know that's why it
would all have access would have to be
[58:48] permitted, which you know, kicks in a
whole bunch of C dot stuff right
[58:53] » away from it.
>> Yeah. My name is Sean Sprag. I'm with
[58:57] the Home State job board. I'm the vice
president of the board out there. Uh,
[59:02] this has been a ongoing problem for six
years now. We approached the county. uh
[59:08] when I was building my house out there
during COVID uh and we approached the
[59:14] county because I we had to get
inspections to make sure that a fire
[59:18] truck could get to my house in order to
get permits. Um we have recently put
[59:24] almost a million dollars into the trial
club and fire mitigation. We're trying
[59:27] to become the first uh association in
Lake County to be firewise. So we've got
[59:34] grants from the state. We've also done a
ton of work ourselves. Um, and we've met
[59:40] with Dan's team here to improve the
roads, the bridges. Um, all the coverts
[59:47] have been extended to over 20 ft wide.
Um, and we're trying to meet the class
[59:52] one classification for a fire truck to
go in there. And this simply doesn't.
[59:57] That's 13 ft wide. the dip in the
middle, which is extremely dangerous, um
[1:00:03] is over the uh restrictions for a class
one truck to go over that. It dips
[1:00:08] almost almost a foot, foot and a half.
Um and so in order for us to really
[1:00:15] achieve that, you know, you guys have
dealt with this fire situation. We've
[1:00:20] this is not just reactive to willow
fire. This is something that's been
[1:00:24] ongoing for the last 3 to four years.
This fire mitigation that we're trying
[1:00:28] to achieve, we have homeowners that
can't uh even get insurance out there.
[1:00:33] So, um, we were proposing just a simple
gate widening, which, uh, I've reached
[1:00:40] out, we've reached out as a team, I
guess I should say, uh, other board
[1:00:44] members have reached out to the state to
get clarification on the issue that he's
[1:00:49] speaking to, um, about what would need
if we just did a simple gate
[1:00:54] replacement. Um, so the simple gate
replacement was not going to trigger any
[1:01:00] of the warnings. I have emails from that
and that was over 5 years ago that we
[1:01:03] had that.
>> We also had uh what I would call bad
[1:01:07] faith from the county of told not to
speak about this issue which we are very
[1:01:13] aware of. Um
and and so we had to reach out for
[1:01:18] council on this. So we reached out
council. All we're simply looking for
[1:01:22] from home stakes perspective maybe when
the you know we our understanding is
[1:01:28] that that we are an existing uh
homeowners association and unless we you
[1:01:35] were putting in a new homeowners
association you would need those turn
[1:01:39] lanes and that kind of upgrade but
because we're not we're an existing
[1:01:44] homeowners association and I have emails
to show that I've got clarification on
[1:01:48] this that all we simply we need to do is
widen the gate. 20 ft wide is what we're
[1:01:53] looking for. A newer gate. They put a
newer gate across the highway that
[1:01:58] doesn't serve anybody. Uh new cattle
grade that doesn't serve anyone that
[1:02:02] goes to horse horse stable. So that was
kind of questioning that happened after
[1:02:07] we asked for this to get done. Um but
yeah, if we had that map of close call
[1:02:14] incidents, it would be a daily mark on
this. It's a very dangerous turnout. In
[1:02:20] fact, uh there's a depth just right up
the street that there was people speed
[1:02:25] on that section 55. Guarantee you it's
70 as an average through there. So,
[1:02:31] we're just simply asking that the county
do in good work in good faith with this
[1:02:36] since it's been a six-year process uh
that we get the gate widened
[1:02:41] immediately. We we've asked for it for
six years. It's been put off. It's we've
[1:02:45] been slow played pretty big and it's
we're not lot lot of lot of smart people
[1:02:51] working here. I I run a metro district.
I know how the process works. We're
[1:02:55] hoping we can at least get this on the
budget for this year coming into the
[1:02:59] summer. It probably wasn't budgeted for
it anytime or going forward. I'm sure
[1:03:04] it's not budgeted now. So, we're just
looking to see if we can get on a
[1:03:08] budget, at least get the gate replaced.
And then as the people in Trout Club are
[1:03:15] becoming yearly,
just a quick background, to buy a house,
[1:03:19] she she's a real estate agent, she knows
to buy a house, you have to pay cash.
[1:03:24] So, to simply buy six, you know, there's
little Kevin in there, too. But simply
[1:03:30] by $500,000 c cash uh offer for a house
there. You know, you can tell what kind
[1:03:36] of clientele we're starting to get out
there. We do have a lot of people that
[1:03:39] have got their cabins hand-me-down, but
that's now changing. We got year round
[1:03:44] access. Got people that come up during
the ski season. Um so yeah, I mean we
[1:03:51] really really I think the gate could go
away. We'd be happy with that. There's
[1:03:56] no we don't have horses or cattle. I
know Colorado is a uh fence. What is it?
[1:04:01] A fence out state, which is odd, but um
>> Sean, can I ask you? I don't see a gate.
[1:04:07] » No gate.
>> Well, you keep saying gate. No, you
[1:04:10] gate.
>> Great. I should say guard. Yeah.
[1:04:13] » So, there's no real reason to have the
cattle guard there.
[1:04:15] » No, we So, you can see there's a fence
to the south, which is the left of that
[1:04:19] picture. if there were ever going to be
any kind of horses or anything, that
[1:04:25] property, the property to the north,
which is to the right, has never been
[1:04:29] used uh for for grazing or any purposes
like that. So, truly, I think that the
[1:04:35] the point where the you know, you don't
really need one there and our our
[1:04:40] homeowners really don't want one. So,
it's really difficult to pull in because
[1:04:45] you kind of have to pull in at you're
almost scared to pull in at a slow
[1:04:49] speed. So, you kind of have to pull in
and then there's no apron there. It's
[1:04:53] all uh gravel. You can see the damage in
the lower left there. Um from the gravel
[1:05:00] meets the Yeah. If you bring your mouse
to the left a little more. Sorry.
[1:05:05] » Yeah. Right there. Yeah. Yeah. That's
created because there's no apron. Um so
[1:05:10] maintenance is probably an issue with
that for the highway department um at
[1:05:15] some point. It doesn't bother anybody
right now. But um but yeah, I mean I I
[1:05:21] just think right now we'd love to see
the gate disappear or or at least get to
[1:05:27] where we can safely get a truck in and
out and during any kind of emergency
[1:05:32] have better access. That's our concerns.
>> So couple questions for
[1:05:38] » those involved here. So heard earlier
this is a county road.
[1:05:43] » Yeah, it's county road 21.
Yeah.
[1:05:46] » Okay. So, county has jurisdiction over
the access, but we've got private
[1:05:51] homeowners farther back as an
association. When when was that
[1:05:56] group? When was the development put in?
>> 1934.
[1:06:01] So, long time ago. Long time.
>> Okay.
[1:06:06] So there's some issues on grandfathering
accesses in I mean 1979 was the year
[1:06:13] that the highway access law was put into
place. Anything at that point is
[1:06:18] grandfathered in. But then there's also
a provision that is as traffic increases
[1:06:23] over time then the provisions of the
code will kick in.
[1:06:28] But as a as a county road, you could
apply for a C dot highway access permit
[1:06:34] and go in there and do the widening that
you needed to. And part of that permit
[1:06:38] would say
depending on what the traffic volume
[1:06:43] show, but it may show that left turn
del, right turn del, you know, all of
[1:06:48] those auxiliary lanes would be up for
for looking at whether they're required
[1:06:53] or not for per for the law. But at a
minimum, you could come in first step,
[1:06:59] just widen the access, do what you need
to do, and then budget for the larger
[1:07:03] project to come in and do the turn lanes
at another point. We would seed dot
[1:07:10] would prefer that this is not on CO
rightway and that cattle guard should be
[1:07:15] moved if it stays or if it's taken out.
>> Removed. Yeah.
[1:07:19] » Yeah. But if it something needs to say
that would be part of the permit is you
[1:07:24] move it off of the seed dot rideway so
that it's farther back.
[1:07:29] » So one of the things with with access
permitting is
[1:07:33] let's just say that by the book this
location warrants a couple turn lanes.
[1:07:39] Okay.
>> Mhm.
[1:07:40] » Doesn't have them. So
you don't necessarily have to go to that
[1:07:46] extent to do anything if you're just
doing a betterment.
[1:07:50] It doesn't necessarily have to meet
every standard by the book that we would
[1:07:54] like to see there because it's still
better than what you got.
[1:07:58] » So we do have the ability to permit
betterments like what you're talking
[1:08:02] about um pretty simply.
>> Right.
[1:08:07] One clarifying point on that, that works
for a public road. If it's a private
[1:08:14] access, that's not the case.
>> The just to reiterate this, I'll say it
[1:08:20] twice. For a public road, you have the
option to do things in increments as a
[1:08:25] better.
[1:08:30] And just to be clear, why don't we can
just take the cattle guard out,
[1:08:36] » right? There's no
>> Yeah, I guess they're saying I can take
[1:08:39] it out.
[1:08:43] » I mean, I think I think our board has
really felt like this issue has been
[1:08:47] kind of put aside by the county for
quite some time. Um, we brought it up to
[1:08:54] previous commissioners. Um, and I coach
volleyball. I've been here for a long
[1:09:00] time, 30 31 years now. Um, and I've
actually had some conversations with
[1:09:07] those previous commissioners um, about
this. So, we I have some insight as to
[1:09:13] how this kind of went down and was
ignored purposely. It was just kind of
[1:09:17] painful and hurtful that, you know, I
know my wife pulls out of there every
[1:09:21] day. So, you know, I I think um just
moving forward would be nice that it's
[1:09:27] acknowledged. This meeting's amazing. Um
that it's acknowledged and it's on the
[1:09:32] radar and it's something that we look to
improve. Um yeah, I I really I mean our
[1:09:39] board would love to just see it
disappear. It would be uh I think
[1:09:44] honestly cost just to pull it out, put
in gravel um is a very low cost to get
[1:09:52] something done like that. So
>> how many
[1:09:54] » I would agree.
>> How many homes are up there?
[1:09:57] » 70. We have 72 cabins
>> and some are seasonal or
[1:10:01] » um yeah, there it's starting to increase
getting a lot more year round. In fact,
[1:10:06] I I would say seasonal, but they're
using it both winter and summer now. uh
[1:10:10] because we used to not plow all the
roads back there, but now we plow
[1:10:14] everything uh with the road improvements
that we've made. So, um there's probably
[1:10:19] only 20 residents, give or take, uh now
that are permanent year round. Um but I
[1:10:26] I would say the majority of them are are
using it in the winter now just for the
[1:10:31] ski cabin effect kind of thing.
>> Well, Sean, we'd really like to do the
[1:10:37] work at this point. Yeah,
>> that would be great.
[1:10:40] » It seems like a really reasonable
request. So, we'll we'll
[1:10:45] try and make it happen. Maybe next next
year. I know this year is tight with the
[1:10:50] fire.
>> I lost the summer time already.
[1:10:52] » Yeah, I'm sure.
>> I I understand. I run a metro district.
[1:10:56] I understand how all works. You got a
budget for it, so I'm not expecting this
[1:10:59] to happen in this budget year. I don't
know how your guys's budgets are set up,
[1:11:04] but uh but I would hope that we would
look to maybe get that on future plans
[1:11:09] for sure.
>> We do try and avoid oneoff expenses, but
[1:11:12] » just to make a point, we have done a lot
of work on this. Okay.
[1:11:16] » Yeah. A lot. We have changed all the
culvers out on it.
[1:11:18] » Yeah. um at the main crossing there.
This one was unproposed for one of our
[1:11:24] new bridges,
>> but we only had a chance for five and so
[1:11:28] this one was the last one to drop, but
that's why we changed to put only covers
[1:11:32] in there.
>> Yeah.
[1:11:33] » So, that was one of the first ones we
did in that that
[1:11:36] » system of the river flowing down the
valley.
[1:11:39] » Make sure it would all flow pretty good.
>> Um the beavers like it up there.
[1:11:46] » Yeah. Um there's a couple beaver dams on
um Tennessee Creek that are getting
[1:11:53] really close to the highway right away
or the highway surface.
[1:11:59] » Can I ask a clarifying question just
longer term about future of the road
[1:12:02] itself? Is there so if I'm understanding
correctly it only provides access to
[1:12:09] home state. Is there any benefit to
homestake or benefit to the county that
[1:12:13] this would this road itself would be
conveyed to homestake?
[1:12:18] » I think that was mentioned for sure. Uh
we've had several discussions about it.
[1:12:22] Um I think especially after they've done
the um the improvements to the to the
[1:12:30] river there access. Um yeah, I mean it
it has to get permission from you guys
[1:12:38] to go that direction, but uh and we
would have the means. No problem. We
[1:12:42] have the heavy equipment and we have we
have a really amazing caretaker who
[1:12:46] would love to pull that gate out. So um
but yeah, that I think that comes down
[1:12:52] to you guys giving us access or
permission to be a full private road. So
[1:12:58] » Michael, on your side of things, like
what is that like? It's about a mile of
[1:13:03] road that we maintain. So, we want to
maintain it. Lastly, we do go all the
[1:13:07] way to the clubhouse because we have to
turn around and get out where the
[1:13:10] properties start where the property
start before the county road actually
[1:13:15] ends. Um, there's no place to turn
around there.
[1:13:19] » Yeah.
>> Well, that sounds like a solution
[1:13:22] or possible solution. Is there any
drawbacks that we lose any funding or
[1:13:26] does it cost more to maintain than
>> Well, the the betterment permit will
[1:13:30] only work for a public road, which I
think is something we might lean on to
[1:13:34] get the widening done,
>> right?
[1:13:39] » Yeah.
>> Yeah.
[1:13:40] » Good catch, Andy.
>> I mean, it could be problematic for any
[1:13:43] future development is is the only thing
out there,
[1:13:46] » right? I mean, you could convey it in
such a manner that I think you could
[1:13:51] preserve that with, you know, preserving
easements and so forth for the county,
[1:13:55] but but that's the one thing you'd want
to think about is the future.
[1:14:00] » Is it something that the county could
maintain ownership and delegate
[1:14:06] maintenance?
>> We could probably use
[1:14:12] Well, Sean, we're going to follow up
with this and we really I'd really like
[1:14:15] to see it. It seems like simple. It
seems overly complicated and simple at
[1:14:20] the same time.
>> Thank you.
[1:14:22] » So, uh, sorry it took so long.
>> Yeah.
[1:14:27] » Jeez, we'll keep following up. I know
this has been on Andy's radar for a long
[1:14:31] time. So
>> yeah,
[1:14:35] » I think that my impression Andy's
brought it up a few times to us and my
[1:14:39] impression has been trying to figure out
who is responsible for what has been the
[1:14:42] biggest lift for us as new BOCC and all
of our new staff. So now that we're
[1:14:48] here, happy to move on it.
>> Yeah,
[1:14:52] » it's clear now. Sometimes it's hard to
understand what the past and all that
[1:14:56] stuff, but
>> it's great to now have some clarity and
[1:15:00] know that it's got to be on the list.
>> I'm also really sorry for how you've
[1:15:05] been treated that you've been working on
this for so long and have felt so
[1:15:08] discouraged. It's not how you I'm really
sorry about that.
[1:15:12] » It's It's okay. It was just kind of a a
stick in the eye when you're out there
[1:15:15] doing fire mitigation and the guy from
the fire department's telling you that
[1:15:19] your roads must be
to for us to bring a fire truck to your
[1:15:25] house, which is what you want. And you
see a fire out your window, which we got
[1:15:30] great views this year. And then you know
that he's telling you 20 foot wide and
[1:15:36] you know that the very entrance of your
community is not that. So yes, it was uh
[1:15:42] it was why I asked to be on the board.
Um uh Homestake, I'm usually pretty busy
[1:15:48] guy other than than that. I run a metro
district and I coach for so long. So uh
[1:15:54] I actually asked on it because my wife's
had several really close calls out
[1:15:59] there. If you're trying to stop and
someone doesn't want to stop behind you
[1:16:03] to turn left to go in there, they go
around you and that's really dangerous.
[1:16:08] Yeah. So we just just just just the
close calls recently. I just said I we
[1:16:13] have to move forward on this and we got
to draw some attention. So that's why
[1:16:17] I'm here.
>> Thank you.
[1:16:18] » Yeah.
>> Thank you Sean.
[1:16:23] You're welcome.
>> We'll follow up.
[1:16:26] » So just to reiterate on the seed
process, you would um apply for highway
[1:16:31] access permit.
>> Okay.
[1:16:32] » To do any work in the highway rightway.
So even widening on the side of the
[1:16:39] highway would require that cuz it's in
the rightway.
[1:16:42] » In order to do the betterment, it would
have to stay a public road.
[1:16:46] » Correct. Otherwise, you know, the study
would potentially require a massive
[1:16:50] improvement.
>> And it might be worth doing a study just
[1:16:54] to see what what's there. Anyway, I
don't know. You know,
[1:16:57] » we could we do the betterment and have
an agreement like you said where the
[1:17:02] homeowners association is maintaining
the road with the county owns it. What
[1:17:06] happens beyond the C not right away is
between you and the home association.
[1:17:11] » Okay.
>> But this is definitely in the C not
[1:17:14] right away.
>> Well, I that's what I'm hearing. I I was
[1:17:19] trying to pull it up on my phone, but
now I've lost connection on my phone,
[1:17:21] too. So,
>> no. What is happening?
[1:17:27] » There there's publicly accessible. You
can see the what what C do show us for
[1:17:32] rideway bathrooms also in addition to
your county AG. So that's right
[1:17:37] » and that is the same permit process if
we're just going to do the Betterment
[1:17:40] who would do the access permit.
>> Correct. It's all work at the access and
[1:17:47] it would all fall into that process.
[1:17:53] » Private Go ahead.
>> Just something generally to be aware of
[1:17:56] for everyone in this room. We have
applied for um the safe streets and
[1:17:59] roads for all grant to take a look at
county all county roads. Um this was
[1:18:03] sort of precipitated by what's going on
out on county road 4 um at the lake but
[1:18:08] um this would certainly fall into the
scope of that of that project and I
[1:18:12] don't know if that you know assists or
advances the study you all would need to
[1:18:17] um allow for an additional project in
that area or if there's something
[1:18:20] specific they have to do.
>> Yeah. So this is a plan for all of the
[1:18:24] county that they have to look at, not
just January 4th.
[1:18:29] » This is one of them. So
>> I mean things are moving. It's just
[1:18:33] slow.
>> On that road study once we have it done
[1:18:39] opens us up to apply for additional
grant funding. No.
[1:18:43] » Okay.
[1:18:50] » Okay. Any other issues, Josh, that we
need to talk about on 24?
[1:18:54] » I think um so if we're done talking
about home state, we do have another uh
[1:18:58] topic for for Highway 24 South.
>> Okay.
[1:19:01] » Um the C CPD and public works are
currently considering a driveway permit.
[1:19:07] Um at uh yeah, 20 2100 Highway 24 South.
Um this is driveway access that drops
[1:19:14] directly down onto Highway 24. So again,
we accessed off the state highway. Um,
[1:19:20] and Ann has some background to share on
this. I believe we also have Tom Marson
[1:19:26] Engineering should be joining us who has
some background on the design of this
[1:19:30] particular site.
>> There's a folder in teams that says
[1:19:33] driveway.
Do we want to look at the spot?
[1:19:37] » Thank you. I I
>> No worries.
[1:19:42] » Um, yeah. So, if you can get to the
location, I have sent an email to
[1:19:49] You should be joining us soon here.
>> Go a bit further.
[1:19:53] » Oops. Excuse me.
>> It's almost to the toxic entrance or
[1:19:59] » Yeah. Yeah.
>> Wait a second. Let me just orient
[1:20:03] myself. I do know where it is. Give me a
second.
[1:20:07] » It's like up
>> here. A little more south.
[1:20:12] » Game changer.
>> Game changer.
[1:20:15] There you go. Here
it is.
[1:20:20] And then
>> right down there. Right where the one
[1:20:24] Yes.
>> Yep.
[1:20:26] » Do we want to look at it here? Should I
pull up stuff on Teams and Andy will
[1:20:30] share with you?
>> Okay. Thank
[1:20:32] » the engineer design for the driveway.
>> So, um I've sent a quick email. Tom's
[1:20:37] been multitasking, I think. Um Ed will
be joining us in a moment. Hopefully. I
[1:20:42] don't quite see him in attendance yet.
Um, so just a little background on this.
[1:20:48] Um, this is the county's access um here
um that we allowed the property owner to
[1:20:56] utilize to um for access for their
driveway. Um this parcel is one of our
[1:21:03] um favorite probate plat out in um E
Hill. And so um our first thought is,
[1:21:11] wow, this is quite the site to develop.
Um but it did have a platted um ability
[1:21:17] to access it at this point. They
approached Michael about being able to
[1:21:21] use our CO access point and um so they
did coordinate with C dot on um the
[1:21:28] access and then this driveway design is
something obviously that's been very
[1:21:32] challenging. So when they came in for
building permit um and applied for the
[1:21:37] driveway, I did place a stop work order
on this um driveway until we could get
[1:21:43] an engineer design on it. Um so they
worked with um one design and recently
[1:21:51] um they disengaged with their previous
engineer who actually had retired and
[1:21:56] have contracted with Marson Engineering
and this is a redesign of the driveway
[1:22:02] access. This gets a lot of um public
scrutiny um and concerns from our
[1:22:07] previous board as well as current board
about the safety. So, we've worked
[1:22:13] really closely with Brian Kian from C
DOT and Candace from C DOT. We've done
[1:22:17] site visits um at the site to look at
the engineer design. This was the
[1:22:22] previous design. Michael goes by this
obviously every day and is really our um
[1:22:27] eyes in real time to make sure that we
have stability of that that slope and
[1:22:32] and safety um to kind of alleviate
safety concerns. We do take a lot of um
[1:22:39] concerned comments from the adjacent
property owner Paul Irwin in this area.
[1:22:44] And um so this does get elevated to
Michael and I often. And um so just
[1:22:50] wanted to include this today to give you
kind of a situational update of where we
[1:22:54] are in the process. The building permit
has not been extended yet until we can u
[1:23:00] make sure that this new um engineered
design is approvable. Um, the driveway
[1:23:06] uh permit needs to be updated with the
design. So, Michael today, I think we'll
[1:23:11] have to kind of take that opportunity to
hear from um Tom Marson on the new
[1:23:15] design.
Hopefully, there he is. Tom is with us
[1:23:19] and you can kind of um before we
introduce Tom, is there any questions
[1:23:25] that you have in regards to kind of the
history and what led us to where we are
[1:23:28] today?
>> I do have a little bit more history to
[1:23:30] add to that.
Access is actually
[1:23:35] um approved and permitted by C do prior
to these people owning this property was
[1:23:42] for an adjacent property that had to use
the same access would be a public road,
[1:23:47] not technically a county road because
it's in that subdivision,
[1:23:52] but that's why the county had to approve
them accessing CO because it is a public
[1:23:57] road
and that was permitted in that
[1:24:03] the early 2000s 2005 someone there um
and I believe it was I think they've
[1:24:10] been trying to sell their property
because they realize that they cannot
[1:24:14] access their property.
>> Yeah. Be able to again you have the
[1:24:19] appropriate plots which consider access
without taking into account really doing
[1:24:24] the engineering work and topography that
it would need to make these feasible.
[1:24:28] So, it was the John White property that
originally petitioned the county for the
[1:24:32] ability to to use the access to put in
the road, but that road design has never
[1:24:38] come to fruition.
>> Um, so this is the first improvement
[1:24:41] that's coming off of that in the form of
the driveway.
[1:24:44] » So, and just to be clear, when he got
his construction permit,
[1:24:50] he didn't have a driveway permit.
>> He did.
[1:24:52] » He did.
>> Oh.
[1:24:53] » Um, he did, but it
>> was from Ceda. And then when I know that
[1:24:56] the first permit was issued by Michael,
>> um, but when we did a bit of review
[1:25:03] looking at the attributes of the
driveway and then started seeing the
[1:25:07] actual earth work happening on site, I
actually I I did a stop work um and I
[1:25:14] spoke about it and and I gave him
direction that he needed to bring in an
[1:25:17] engineer design. we were considered. We
were um concerned about a lot of the
[1:25:21] design elements of this driveway
>> and so we did a stop a stop work order
[1:25:26] and and then that was the the first time
we ever seen the engineered design and
[1:25:31] then um Tom has come in and redefined
that design.
[1:25:35] » Okay.
>> So can I just ask one more question?
[1:25:40] » Actually two because that was the first
one. Um
[1:25:43] let's see. Uh, so when did all this has
this been because that's been built
[1:25:47] that's been going on for 3 years.
>> A really good question of how long um I
[1:25:54] would say I think this was right when I
took over the directorship. So I think
[1:25:58] it was right in 2022
>> that we started um on this project.
[1:26:03] » Okay.
>> All right. Thank you.
[1:26:07] Just a little more background to you
that when Michael says public road and
[1:26:12] talks about the probate courts, probate
courts have the ability to essentially
[1:26:17] subdivide property without county
approval. They can go in and any court
[1:26:22] can go in and issue an order. And so
what happened is this property all got
[1:26:26] essentially subdivided
these lots through court process, not a
[1:26:32] county process.
And the court
[1:26:36] uh put on the plat that these are public
roads even though I don't think we've
[1:26:43] officially accepted any of those roads
or maintain them. So public roads is
[1:26:48] kind of a a loose term not necessarily a
county road but it's really a little bit
[1:26:54] undefined what public road means in the
context.
[1:26:59] » Isn't there access from up above too?
>> That's where the contention comes in.
[1:27:04] » Okay. Right.
>> And that belongs to
[1:27:08] all.
>> So, I'm jumping ahead of
[1:27:14] » We went we we went with previous council
and looked at what the plaque showed,
[1:27:18] but we couldn't establish um an easement
that could be utilized in order to gain
[1:27:24] access from up. And that was the first
solution that we tried to uh when I put
[1:27:29] in the stop work orders, the first thing
I started working with our previous land
[1:27:33] use council to see if we could go back
and establish access from a better
[1:27:37] bearing point, a more reasonable access.
Um but we were unable to do that and we
[1:27:43] did not have the cooperation from the
adjacent property owner.
[1:27:46] » Okay.
[1:27:49] » All right. Well, shall we hear from
Morrison Engineering?
[1:27:54] How's the How's it going out there on
the driveway?
[1:27:59] » How's I haven't looked at it in a little
bit, but we did drop some plans. Um, it
[1:28:05] was pretty much a redesign from the
original permitted plan because there
[1:28:10] was some unique features
in the permanent plan set that we didn't
[1:28:14] understand why they were there or how
they could be built. They include a the
[1:28:20] original plan said had an approximate 18
foot wall on the fill slope which is
[1:28:25] this the steeper cobble slope that faces
the highway and a six foot wall uphill
[1:28:31] side. It had a 30 foot wide uh platform
on top
[1:28:37] that these return walls were built.
We a normal driveway width is 12 feet
[1:28:44] wide. So why they drew it at 30 ft wide,
I don't know. And there was again a
[1:28:49] retaining wall on the downhill side that
started partially
[1:28:54] up the the steep slope. So it wasn't
protecting all the steep slope. This
[1:28:58] proposed retaining wall. Talking the
Thompsons, they didn't want to build a
[1:29:04] fill wall. I don't think they need to
build a build a fill wall. That means on
[1:29:09] the the downhill side putting in a wall
and filling.
[1:29:14] So maybe we could look at our plans.
Chance, I have my uh colleague Chance.
[1:29:19] So my name is Tom Marson. I'm a civil
engineer and land surveyor. I own Marson
[1:29:25] Engineering. I've been practicing in the
mountain since 1995 is my background.
[1:29:32] Marson Engineering is about 20
personnel.
[1:29:36] We
>> Yeah, if the host can enable a screen
[1:29:39] share, we can pull up some of our plans.
Surely.
[1:29:48] » Oops.
[1:29:56] » Okay, you should have screen sharing
ability and I might have accidentally
[1:30:00] muted you. Sorry.
[1:30:19] Oops.
[1:30:26] » Nice. We can see that. Um, but you're
still muted. Just FYI.
[1:30:33] » She's good. Okay.
>> Give us a moment.
[1:30:40] Is that large enough on an advisor's
end?
[1:30:43] » Sure.
>> Mhm.
[1:30:46] » Okay. So,
this sheet we call our site plan. It
[1:30:50] helps us get orientated with
uh what's going on out there. The you
[1:30:56] can see highway 24 and then you see a
lightly gray shaded um
[1:31:02] road that goes up up the hill. That is
what they've built to date.
[1:31:08] Um, and that roughly matches the
original design plan with the exception
[1:31:14] of Can you guys see my cursor?
>> Yeah.
[1:31:20] » Around here there was scheduled to be an
18t wall
[1:31:24] and
for the request of the Thompsons and we
[1:31:29] don't see why it was needed. We've we've
eliminated that wall and that steep
[1:31:33] slope. But to get the proper slope
layback, the road had to move over into
[1:31:39] the hill a little bit u from the
alignment that they built. So the darker
[1:31:45] shaded area is
is the engineered road that we've drawn.
[1:31:52] Um
a slight variance in the we're
[1:31:56] requesting a variance which I don't
think should be a big deal. At the entry
[1:31:59] it's a 40 foot radius and at the
switchback it's a also a 40 foot radius.
[1:32:04] in total
uh 50
[1:32:09] by the land use code.
[1:32:13] So, we'll need some retaining walls. You
can see the bright green, that's a green
[1:32:18] space. It's a two two-tiered boulder
retaining walls. What's proposed on the
[1:32:22] uphill side?
Um the downhill side will just be
[1:32:26] graded.
And I know there's a lot of concern
[1:32:30] there. So, we did some studies and I'm
gonna have Chance look the pages here
[1:32:40] section.
>> Yeah, we'll just cut to the deep steeper
[1:32:43] part.
[1:32:47] Um,
flip up to the plan view again. So, see
[1:32:52] those crosssections? What about the
cross-sections?
[1:33:00] this one. Okay, scroll in.
So, you see numbers like 5 plus 0 0
[1:33:09] uh four 4 plus 0 0. That's where these
cross-sections are drawn. 4 plus 0 0 4 +
[1:33:15] 50 5 plus 0. And now we'll go back and
look at the cross-sections.
[1:33:32] Um,
let's go to
[1:33:38] here's an example of
of what we're proposing. It also
[1:33:43] indicates what they've built.
You see that the blue line?
[1:33:50] That's the steepest we'd want to stack
um this type of
[1:33:55] mater one and a half to one. So for
every foot of drop, we need to go a half
[1:34:00] horizontally.
Uh we have a more conservative design
[1:34:05] with a dash line that's a 1.7 to one and
you can see what the existing slope is.
[1:34:13] We did an analysis. We did the initial
topo on this property
[1:34:18] and some of this has been disturbed but
not greatly. We compared the topos about
[1:34:25] the same. So this slope had been
standing at at that layback for
[1:34:31] um you know probably decades if not
longer.
[1:34:37] We just pulled the road platform back.
You can see where they've currently
[1:34:40] built the road platform.
And then at the tip of our blue line
[1:34:46] here, you can see where the proposed
road platform is. This is one of the
[1:34:49] worst uh crosssections, meaning more
challenging sections to get through. And
[1:34:55] there's quite a bit of cut on the uphill
side that's not 100% refined, but we get
[1:35:00] the idea that they're going to have to
move some material around to get this to
[1:35:04] work.
[1:35:07] Uh the red line that's vertical on this
cross-section indicates the right of
[1:35:11] way. You know, on the left side, it's
the the highway rightway. On the right
[1:35:15] side is the private property of that
vertical red line. And then the edge of
[1:35:20] traveled way is marked with an X and a
and a little tag on the far left side
[1:35:24] there.
[1:35:28] At 1.5 to one or flatter,
it's not likely that a boulder will roll
[1:35:37] or if it does, it won't go very far.
It'll alter to the toe of the slope, but
[1:35:42] we're going to stop that they remove any
loose scree or boulders on there. And we
[1:35:49] would anticipate that that the material
would be stable after that.
[1:35:56] Hold on.
[1:36:00] » Wait, can can I get clarification on
that real quick? You're going to request
[1:36:04] that they remove any loose boulders or
any loose debris.
[1:36:08] » Is that what Yeah.
Yeah.
[1:36:11] » Okay. Thanks.
>> Who who would who would be responsible
[1:36:14] for ensuring that that's happening?
>> Well, the
[1:36:21] uh the contractor would be the one
responsible to make that happen. And I
[1:36:25] think the county has requested that we
do periodic inspections on the
[1:36:28] construction of this work. So, we'll go
out and
[1:36:33] u confirm that they've built this to
what we intended them to build to.
[1:36:38] » Great. Thank you.
[1:36:42] » Hey Tom, this is Michael. I do have a
question if you want to go back to where
[1:36:46] the access is to the highway.
>> I believe the speed up permit says that
[1:36:50] has to be a 90°
access from the highway.
[1:36:55] » And I think it turns really quick, maybe
leaving the highway.
[1:37:00] » Okay, let's Our screen's got to catch
up. Just hold on.
[1:37:04] » Yeah, it's trying.
There you go.
[1:37:10] Okay. So, you can see in the light
lighter gray shading, that's what
[1:37:14] they've built.
And you can see in the darker gray
[1:37:18] shading, that's what we've designed. So,
we have a 40 foot tangent per the C dot
[1:37:23] access code. So, it's a 40 foot
straightaway 90 degrees to highway 24.
[1:37:30] Um,
so,
[1:37:33] so it will be a 90 degree um axis.
Okay.
[1:37:39] » The original plan was not drawn that
way.
[1:37:42] » Ends right there in that in the green
section. That's all the right away
[1:37:46] that's permitted
with the seat out permit.
[1:37:52] That 40ft toner looks good.
>> We realize that in these challenging
[1:37:56] terrain situations, it's not always
possible. So, it's good to see that much
[1:38:02] is possible.
[1:38:08] Who was just making those comments? Uh,
>> it's Mark Bunnel from Ced.
[1:38:13] » Do you guys ever allow a variance to the
40 foot tangent?
[1:38:18] uh occasionally
the
[1:38:23] » it's the variance would be more on the
the 40 foot length because we want that
[1:38:28] passenger car to be able to pull up and
have good sight line both directions.
[1:38:35] So it would be more about shortening the
40 foot before we would entertain
[1:38:41] uh something that's not perpendicular to
the highway.
[1:38:47] Um, sure. So, that's that's where I was
going. We've been meaning to reach out
[1:38:51] to you and we've kept catch you live in
front of everybody, but uh um it might
[1:38:56] help these guys a little bit where we
see that green wall or we see a boulder,
[1:39:00] a green space, and a boulder wall. We'd
be able to reduce that a little bit if
[1:39:04] we could reduce that tangent. But I
wanted to get this concept in front of
[1:39:08] everybody. If it's if it's liked, this
is a 90% set. If it's not liked, then
[1:39:14] we'll,
you know, we'll go back to the drawing
[1:39:17] board and and tweak it per the requests
of this meeting or
[1:39:22] from the county.
But, um,
[1:39:27] regardless of that radius is proposed at
40, that tangent might be able to be
[1:39:31] reduced a little bit, but it will be a
90 degree axis.
[1:39:35] Um once we get up to station 2 plus 0 0
we'll be in that alignment.
[1:39:43] So reducing that tangent would just pull
this out of the hillside a little bit
[1:39:47] and less walls would need to be built
less earthwork.
[1:39:52] But again, this alignment once we get
through this uh
[1:39:57] these corners would would follow the
same track.
[1:40:08] » Yeah, you answered my question.
>> So, just talk with go through Brian
[1:40:14] Kellian on that request on the variance.
[1:40:26] or Nick if you're at that stage in the
process. Nick, no request.
[1:40:36] » Um,
[1:40:40] so just really from um
0 plus 40, which it means 40T from the
[1:40:46] highway to 2 plus 0. That would be just
modified a little bit if we could
[1:40:51] shorten up that tangent, but otherwise
the the road going up the slope, uh the
[1:40:56] driveway would be remain in its same
location. We're proposing a 16 foot wide
[1:41:01] platform
and that's what's drafted here and
[1:41:04] shaded with 12 feet being the traveled
way and a 4ft buffer
[1:41:10] uh for guard rail or
they might want to do earth and burm or
[1:41:14] boulders or something. But there needs
to be some protection to prevent
[1:41:18] vehicles from going over the side of
this boat.
[1:41:30] We have a a pull out proposed up at the
switchback.
[1:41:35] Since they've already graded that area,
it's not a big deal for them to in
[1:41:39] install that.
We probably
[1:41:44] place one at the midpoint between the
entry and the uh switchback. Also, less
[1:41:50] robust that you see there.
[1:42:02] So, kind of our hope today was to bring
Tom in, answer any um questions about
[1:42:07] the design that the board had. Um, also
let you know that this will be put into
[1:42:13] final review and then final approval of
the driveway would be in um Michael's
[1:42:18] court to review the design um approve
potential variances from the county
[1:42:24] standpoint and then um direct them to
work with Brian um or C do on any
[1:42:31] variance requested on the access permit.
Um, wanted to create some awareness that
[1:42:37] that's where your staff is working on
ensuring the safety of this driveway and
[1:42:42] and ensuring compliance with our code is
as well as working with CO for
[1:42:46] compliance on the access. So happy to
answer any questions you might have.
[1:42:51] Thank you.
[1:42:55] » I don't have any questions. Uh, Andy, do
you have any questions? you know, I
[1:43:01] don't have this spells things out really
clearly for me and will give me a little
[1:43:06] bit of information to relay back to any
concerned public members. Um, and all of
[1:43:13] this information that we're looking at
right now, is that something that you
[1:43:17] have ready access to to allay um
concerns? I mean, this has been a a
[1:43:25] pretty contentious topic. Um, I know
that the BOCC has been uh
[1:43:32] um approached in in not entirely
professional manners about how this
[1:43:37] whole thing's been um handled. And I
just want to make sure that we we can
[1:43:43] get all this information out to the
people who who might have the wrong idea
[1:43:47] about how all this is going down.
>> Absolutely. This information is
[1:43:52] available in the teams folder. We
provided the preliminary design like um
[1:43:56] Thomas indicated that we're at like 90%.
So we haven't fully approved this yet.
[1:44:00] It's still in review, but this
everything that we have in the building
[1:44:04] department um is transparent and
sharable. So um but this particular
[1:44:09] design is in your team's folder now.
[1:44:14] » Okay, great. Thanks. I'm try I've been
trying to open it and it's like real
[1:44:17] glitchy, but maybe it's um because I'm
trying I'm on my computer watching the
[1:44:22] meeting and I'm trying to open it on a
mobile device. So, it's probably it
[1:44:26] probably takes a lot of processing power
to look at these files.
[1:44:31] » We'll go ahead and just um I can send it
directly to your email if you'd like.
[1:44:39] » That would be great. Thank you.
[1:44:48] Well, Mark, thanks for working on that.
We appreciate it. And uh keep keep an
[1:44:53] eye on them and we'll move forward with
this.
[1:44:59] » We'll try and move forward.
[1:45:03] » Thank you.
[1:45:07] » You're welcome everybody.
>> There's any further questions, let me
[1:45:11] know.
Appreciate it.
[1:45:16] » No questions from us and
good luck.
[1:45:23] » All right. Thank you.
>> Okay.
[1:45:27] Okay. So, a real quick uh interview
before we completely leave the the state
[1:45:32] highways and move to this the discussion
about the the Grand Canyon USI
[1:45:35] deliveries. Just for board awareness, um
a recent development and I saw Kurt
[1:45:40] Schweer was here a moment ago. Looks
like he had to step out. But um Kurt had
[1:45:44] approached the Friends of Twin Lakes
board in the county about potentially
[1:45:47] collaborating on a grant um down in in
uh Twin Lakes. It was a DOT grant
[1:45:54] specifically around federal lands
access. Um and they were thinking
[1:45:58] creatively about how they could utilize
this funding to create safer access and
[1:46:03] crossings um from the village side uh
onto the federal land. The parking area,
[1:46:08] rest area, and the trails are over
there. Um given the timeline of that
[1:46:12] grant, you know, both friends of film
lakes and the county really didn't have
[1:46:16] capacity to pursue that. We need to
really think through what a partnership
[1:46:19] could potentially look like related to
that. But um one thing that did come out
[1:46:23] of the discussion that we've been
running down on uh the county side um as
[1:46:27] friends of Twin Lakes has asked for us
to place some traffic counters right
[1:46:31] down there at the village so we can get
a a good count and some data for
[1:46:35] potential future grant applications that
might consider some safety measures
[1:46:39] across Highway 82 there. So um nothing
more for real discussion at this point
[1:46:43] unless you have questions, but that was
just an awareness item for everyone. I
[1:46:47] think we're we're we have one piece of
information left uh to get the approval
[1:46:52] » traffic control.
[1:46:56] Put a traffic counter across
>> there.
[1:47:00] All I have to get the permit.
>> Do you have you have your own counter?
[1:47:04] » Yeah.
>> The two counters.
[1:47:10] » Yeah.
And so we're hopeful to have that place
[1:47:13] for Labor Day weekend to get a kind of a
busy weekend down there to get a really
[1:47:16] sense of the the traffic counts, but
unfortunately Kurt's not here to say
[1:47:20] thank you directly to, but we appreciate
them sort of thinking through those
[1:47:23] partnerships and bringing that our
attention down there. So
[1:47:28] » um any questions about that one or go
ahead and move ahead?
[1:47:33] » Okay, Mr. Day, I believe we'll pass the
the microphone to you to give us some
[1:47:37] background on the semi trucks.
>> Sure. Sure. It's Grand West Estates and
[1:47:42] um you know I guess I just want to take
the opportunity to to thank M and his
[1:47:47] team. It's taken a few years but you
know we've made there have been a number
[1:47:51] of improvements made there. Additional
speed limit signs and in strategic
[1:47:56] places um the little yellow tags that
say what do they say? No no no exit or
[1:48:03] » no exit you know on the culde-sac roads.
Um striping on the on the highway was
[1:48:09] refreshed a couple of years ago. Um
what else did you do? Um
[1:48:15] » signs we did paint yellow lines on the
road.
[1:48:20] » The yellow tags
[1:48:24] on that road. That's what's in the
package. A lot of information from the
[1:48:29] county. So, um, thank you.
>> So, I just wanted to thank thank the
[1:48:34] county and Michael in particular for,
you know, for doing all of that.
[1:48:39] actually met all our our requests except
for for one that has a se dot
[1:48:43] implication as well that not just um
county road 99 but other county roads
[1:48:49] are are weight limited for for heavy
trucks, you know, but if you're driving
[1:48:54] down a state highway, um you have no way
to know until you make the the turn that
[1:49:01] that is a county road and it's it's
weight restricted. So, I guess my, you
[1:49:06] know, my question is, is there is there
any way to put signage, you know, when
[1:49:11] you're entering the county on on state
highways to, you know, indicate that
[1:49:16] that county roads are, you know, are
weight limited. Otherwise, you know, a
[1:49:21] semi-truck turning, you know, turning on
to County 99, you know, sees the weight
[1:49:26] limit sign, you know, maybe 50 feet on
down the county road, but, you know, has
[1:49:30] no choice but to, you know, but to keep
going. So, how, you know, just from a
[1:49:35] general perspective, is there any way to
to alert, you know, truck drivers to to
[1:49:41] wait restricted roads before they
actually turn on to them?
[1:49:46] » Yeah. So, it's it's not a problem. I
mean, we can absolutely permit a sign
[1:49:49] that says, you know, intersection ahead,
name of the intersection, maybe it has a
[1:49:54] placard that says weight restrict or
something like that. It's no problem at
[1:49:58] all.
>> So, what's the procedure for doing that?
[1:50:01] send us a request and what the sign
would look like and we would do a simple
[1:50:06] special use permit for that. Okay.
>> Okay. And I know the agenda item had an
[1:50:12] intriguing thing about about semi
trucks, you know, and um you know, there
[1:50:18] was one issue a few years ago where this
came to point that Loop and Lane is one
[1:50:22] of the culde-sac roads off of County 99
and in the middle of the winter, you
[1:50:26] know, a semi-truck had had turned right
onto Loop and Lane, gone up the hill,
[1:50:32] you know, and then there was a culde-sac
turnaround and gotten completely stuck.
[1:50:35] Um why? Google Maps must have told them,
you know, what to do and they, you know,
[1:50:41] that's why the the yellow tails are
helpful to indicate the culde-sac roads
[1:50:45] have no have no exit. So, that was the
intriguing uh teaser on the on the
[1:50:51] agenda item. It only happened once, but
it created, you know, quite a bit of
[1:50:55] chaos to get that truck, you know, I
think they had to back out or something.
[1:51:00] I don't I don't remember the
particulars. Um, so, um, the only other
[1:51:06] issue with County 99 that that we
broached both to Michael and and the
[1:51:12] sheriff was was enforcement. It's turned
into a real racetrack. Um, there have
[1:51:18] been several several accidents. Um Dan
may know about this on the you know as
[1:51:24] you're going west and you make the curb
and you go down towards Leadville
[1:51:28] Junction. There have been several
several cars that have you know gone off
[1:51:32] the road at a high rate of speed on the
downhill side actually knock trees down.
[1:51:37] One of them a couple years ago just
broke a tree. I don't think it was a
[1:51:40] fatality, but you know, but um you know,
increased enforcement, not on just on
[1:51:47] 99, but on all county roads, I think, is
is um you know, is is warranted
[1:51:54] recognizing the resource limitations,
but but there's uh you know, there's a
[1:51:59] lot of speeding on on County 99. I think
Nabel can probably attest to that as
[1:52:04] well. Um um so you know so greater
enforcement um it'd be real easy for a
[1:52:11] sheriff's deputy to park on one of the
culde-sacs and just do a radar hit as of
[1:52:16] traffic uh traffic going by. Um, you
know, so that's just our, you know, our
[1:52:22] last request is some way, you know, to
increase enforcement, not just on this
[1:52:26] road, but, you know, but all county
roads. And again, it'd be interesting to
[1:52:30] know, you know, how many speeding
tickets have been issued on county road
[1:52:34] 99 if
>> the exact way everybody uses and they go
[1:52:39] from 99 to get on to 24, but then it's
90,
[1:52:44] » four, then five. It just continues.
maps will actually route you that
[1:52:49] direction if you're coming from the
south 24.
[1:52:53] » Mhm.
>> You know what else I noticed too is it's
[1:52:56] a great right where the trees end there.
That's a great place to throw your beer
[1:53:01] cans.
>> Oh yeah. Oh yeah. Yeah. It's a
[1:53:06] » that the both sides of the road this
thing are just lined with garbage.
[1:53:10] » Yeah. we're easily able to assess what
the drinking trends are in Lake County
[1:53:15] just by picking up trash along that
along that road. Um but again, did the
[1:53:21] traffic count? So, so we'll see because
because of all the traffic um you know,
[1:53:25] but but um appreciate appreciate the
efforts to uh you know to uh you know to
[1:53:32] make those improvements. It only took
three or four years, not six years. So I
[1:53:37] guess we feel very lucky.
tenacity as its uh rewards, Pete.
[1:53:46] » Okay. Shall we move on to this next item
and let Are you all done? Josh, how can
[1:53:52] we follow up? Who's going to follow up
on that? So,
[1:53:54] » I do have some information to share. I
know it's in the package, but
[1:53:57] » Okay.
>> Just some speed statistics on that road.
[1:54:01] » It's really scary.
>> 95% of the people drive faster than 90.
[1:54:08] » Yes. 90 miles an hour.
>> Yeah, that speed was recorded at 99.3.
[1:54:13] » I'm sorry. You said 90% of the people
who drive on that road go 90 miles an
[1:54:18] hour.
>> 95% 95 percentile is higher than 90
[1:54:24] miles an hour. 85.9.
>> Wow.
[1:54:26] » Oh, the 90th percentile.
>> 95%.
[1:54:29] Whoa. That's super different. Wasn't
there a little uh underground um kind of
[1:54:36] racing scene that was popping up over
there by Leadville Junction for a
[1:54:40] minute? Like I could I felt like I could
hear them from Leadville North and uh
[1:54:46] you could and then you could see the
burnout marks everywhere. Um I thought
[1:54:50] that was but I haven't heard it in in in
a year or so maybe. But it was something
[1:54:53] that I wonder if anybody had any uh
recollection of.
[1:54:59] No, they just like speeding on that
road.
[1:55:01] » Yeah,
>> they're in a hurry.
[1:55:04] » Yeah, that I mean, you're talking about,
you know, maybe speed cameras on on
[1:55:09] state highways, but certainly there's
also opportunities for speed cameras on
[1:55:14] on county roads, especially where there
are the big, you know, the big
[1:55:18] straightaways.
Um,
[1:55:22] » I'm honestly curious what he's like
patrolling is like.
[1:55:27] I think this has come up multiple times
in this room and we haven't really got I
[1:55:32] do wish he was here today. We haven't
really gotten much of an answer from him
[1:55:35] about
patrolling practices,
[1:55:40] especially in some of these hot spots
around the county.
[1:55:44] » That's a good question, Elsa. I feel
like Mountain View kind of funnels right
[1:55:47] into the whole Leadville North area,
too. And it's the same sort of situation
[1:55:53] all the way down Mountain View. It's
really hard to pull out. It's a 30 mph
[1:55:57] speed limit, but nobody drives 30 on
Mountain View.
[1:56:02] » I do.
>> I do.
[1:56:04] » Just to be clear,
>> I do.
[1:56:06] » I catch myself sometimes.
>> Low speed on this road, too, at 9.2
[1:56:10] miles.
>> There's Michael around again.
[1:56:15] » Holding up traffic.
>> Yeah, it's boring to go that speed on
[1:56:19] that
speed.
[1:56:23] » Get a copy of it. We can have that.
>> Oh, perfect. Thank you.
[1:56:28] » Well, one way to increase speeds is to
repave everything. So, that's next on
[1:56:33] our uh agenda here, the 2026 pavement
pole repair schedule.
[1:56:41] » Thank you guys so much,
>> guys. Thanks for coming.
[1:56:43] » You bet.
>> Thank you so much.
[1:56:46] » Thank you.
>> Yeah, I think I get out.
[1:56:49] » Okay, Sean.
>> Have a good day. Appreciate you.
[1:56:51] » Thank you. Thanks, Charlie.
[1:56:56] Um, can we pull up the website
information on the website?
[1:57:02] » The website.
>> Lake County website.
[1:57:05] » Yes.
>> Lake County website.
[1:57:07] » Go to the Google or the Chrome.
>> Yeah.
[1:57:11] » Which one? What are we pulling up?
>> Um, go to road bridge or public works.
[1:57:19] » Bridge.
>> Public works. Road bridge.
[1:57:25] down the bottom is on the side for the
last tab on the left side
[1:57:31] » plan
for the next five years.
[1:57:35] » Could we screen share this if you guys
are looking at something I can't see?
[1:57:39] » Yes. Thank you, Andy.
>> Thank you.
[1:57:49] So currently everything in the light
blue color is what we're supposedly
[1:57:54] doing this year until we just got cut
out from our asphalt source.
[1:57:59] » Oh, really? Bummer.
>> Um because they weren't able to make
[1:58:02] enough material being shut down with the
willow fire. So
[1:58:06] » got it.
>> Um I'm working on backup plan of buying
[1:58:11] asphalt from BV again. Um, it just means
higher price asphalt.
[1:58:17] So, I haven't figured out exactly what I
have to cut out of this year right now.
[1:58:22] Um,
>> our asphalt plants off of
[1:58:24] » the RSA plant will not be operational.
Um, people that are out there that were
[1:58:30] out there making are out there making
asphalt right now. So, it would be 3 to
[1:58:35] 5 million to replace that or to bring it
up to specification.
[1:58:39] » No operation. So, $30,000 in there is
not going to touch it in my budget.
[1:58:46] » Dang.
>> Um, but we have started county road 11
[1:58:51] already. We've got the east side lane
almost to Highway 300.
[1:58:58] » Um, the other side we got about 50%
before they quit making asphalt for us.
[1:59:04] Um, so we will definitely finish that.
We need to get asphalt over the bridge
[1:59:09] on county road 5A. The blue kind of blue
dot over on that corner of the loop.
[1:59:16] » Um I would would love to do 9D and the
bottom of Mountain View cuz there are a
[1:59:24] lot of traffic and they're pretty well
torn up. Mount that part of Mount View
[1:59:28] was not the big project going from Mount
V from Highway 24 to um Silver Hills.
[1:59:41] Once we get if we can get a lot of this
done, that ties a whole lot of
[1:59:46] roads that everybody uses
100% use at some point or another. And
[1:59:53] then the next few years, we can start
looking at moving into town doing
[1:59:58] streets. I was just talking to Matt
earlier about writing some letters to
[2:00:02] get them out to residents, utilities,
and stuff that if they're going to need
[2:00:08] to put something in the road like sewer
lines, gas lines, water lines that they
[2:00:12] get it done
>> before this time because they won't be
[2:00:16] allowed to do it afterwards for at least
two years. Correct. Um, so we don't have
[2:00:21] like what happened out here on Sixth
Street where they repaved it and the
[2:00:25] next year they're kept it up or cut it
up and they're doing more of it now.
[2:00:32] » So looking at
there is a legend. You probably can't
[2:00:36] see it, but the next year is Red Lines.
>> Mhm. 2027.
[2:00:43] And there's those streets in town, but
there's also some down towards Twin
[2:00:48] Lakes and some patching down around
toward Fin Lakes.
[2:01:04] The
>> room 10 down there is a big one, but I'm
[2:01:07] also looking at some other options with
that one because the asphalt is actually
[2:01:10] still in pretty good condition. It just
it's cracked and the cracks are sinking.
[2:01:15] So, if I can get those filled up and
maybe do a couple of chip seals over the
[2:01:19] top of it, kind of like we did the
airport.
[2:01:21] » Yeah.
>> Um I know it's airport's coming back,
[2:01:24] but that was like six or seven years
ago. Um I get some more life out of that
[2:01:29] asphalt cuz it's actually good asphalt.
A lot of our asphalts are really good.
[2:01:33] That's why I'm just doing overlays right
now and then come back and do um chip
[2:01:38] seals over the top of them to make them
go another 10 to 15 years.
[2:01:43] » And like Grand West, we've done we did
with Grand West and a bunch of those
[2:01:46] roads out there
>> and they're all in really good condition
[2:01:49] still. So,
>> yeah.
[2:01:51] » Um
that's our plan. Um and like I said,
[2:01:56] there is a legend on there someplace. I
just don't know where it is. I think
[2:01:59] it's behind where the cameras are.
>> It is upper right hand corner. Um, but
[2:02:02] you can see all the years broken out up
to 2030. And it also has our bridge
[2:02:08] projects on there that we're supposed to
be doing. Um, this summer we're supposed
[2:02:13] to be doing one for the Forest Service
up in Half Moon Creek. Um, we we're
[2:02:19] supplying labor, but it's part of that
grant, too.
[2:02:24] Um, I was hoping to get be able to get
two this summer, but I don't even have
[2:02:29] the bridge for can't even for order yet.
I'm still waiting on engineering.
[2:02:36] » So, that will probably be next to the
bridge.
[2:02:41] » County Road 4 is up in the air. We just
don't know what we're going to do there.
[2:02:47] » Yeah. I mean, the bridge is being
designed. It's almost to where they can
[2:02:50] order it.
>> Oh, I see. if they're just working with
[2:02:52] the bridge people to make sure it fits
in everything in there right now. Okay.
[2:02:56] » So, the final plan should be available
to construct the bridge or to
[2:03:01] manufacture it. Um I just don't know if
we'll get it in the ground this year.
[2:03:05] » To clarify, that's not at the turquoise
closure,
[2:03:08] » right?
>> Yeah, that is that one is still very
[2:03:10] much up in the air. useful.
>> And I think um for just bigger picture,
[2:03:17] this this um agenda item was I think a
commissioner bulk request and part of it
[2:03:22] was to provide you all some information
as to how to respond as you're getting a
[2:03:26] lot of public comment and people
reaching out to you about what's going
[2:03:29] on with XYZ Road.
>> Yes. Um, one of the things that we
[2:03:33] realized through one of the outreaches
is that um, for some reason the color
[2:03:39] coding got turned off on this map and so
it's always been public and available
[2:03:43] for people to look at the coming year's
paving plans, but um, all of the lines
[2:03:47] were showing as black for some reason.
So Michael and and Ann worked with
[2:03:51] Shelby to get this updated so that it's
it's showing according to the legend
[2:03:55] now. So, at least gives about a fiveyear
outlook um in terms of what we're
[2:03:59] planning. Um and you know, Michael kind
of referenced this, but sort of a lot of
[2:04:05] headwinds going against us this year in
in terms of getting a lot of this
[2:04:09] accomplished. So, the fire obviously
stalled everything that had this
[2:04:13] reciprocal effect of u being able to
make asphalt. Um the the folks at United
[2:04:18] companies who we have the agreement with
are working on the highway 24 projects
[2:04:22] both north and south of town. Um, so
they have basically they have enough
[2:04:27] asphalt to do those projects, but no
more to sell to us at the reduced rate,
[2:04:31] which is kind of what our agreement
stood at. So
[2:04:33] » they they did supply the contracted
amount to us. So I can't complain about
[2:04:36] that.
>> They they told us that they give us
[2:04:39] a,000 tons at no cost for using the
pavement material.
[2:04:44] » And I could purchase more at $79 that
time instead of $95 a time. Mhm.
[2:04:50] » But because they weren't able to crush
all the material they needed, um they're
[2:04:55] strapped with what they can do for C
dot. So,
[2:04:59] » okay.
Yeah, I guess helpful like having now
[2:05:02] looked at this, you know, summer 2026
what we've planned. This is all planned
[2:05:07] based on it's timely because we're
having the budget discussions for next
[2:05:10] year, how much we want to put towards
paving towards, you know, across all
[2:05:14] departments, but in particular as you
look at this, if it raises any questions
[2:05:19] or concerns about should we be doing
more, why isn't this getting done versus
[2:05:24] that, that's certainly the time if you
have any guidance for us about how you
[2:05:28] would want to budget for that for this
coming year. Um we we can plug that into
[2:05:32] the budget numbers that you ultimately
have presented in a couple months a
[2:05:36] month and a half or so.
>> I think it's important to note that
[2:05:39] because he Michael and you know road
bridge fund any money he did not spend
[2:05:44] this year does not leave his fund.
>> It is still in the fund.
[2:05:49] » We would just be bud. So, you know, when
you do your budget, you've got your
[2:05:52] beginning fund balance, your revenue,
your expenditure, your ending fund
[2:05:56] balance, and that ending fund balance
just can't be in the negative. So, I
[2:06:01] feel like I should explain this because
I think there was some misunderstanding
[2:06:05] of the public. Anytime we don't touch
the money in a fund, it just stays in
[2:06:11] the fund and is available for use the
next year. I think there are a lot of uh
[2:06:15] comments about deficit spending and
especially in the Ronin Bridge fund. If
[2:06:20] something changes and we didn't get to a
certain amount of paving this year, that
[2:06:25] money is available. We just plan it. We
plan to use it. We show that we plan to
[2:06:30] use part of that fund balance.
It's not really deficit spending,
[2:06:35] especially if you built up the reserve.
Um, which we have. We've built up the
[2:06:41] reserve across many of our funds. Um, so
in terms of like the road and bridge, if
[2:06:46] we plan to do more next year, you know,
based on what Michael knows he can
[2:06:50] accomplish, we're okay to touch that
money we did not spend this year because
[2:06:54] it's sitting in his fund available for
use. So I think that is also helpful,
[2:06:59] you know, to know. It's not like, you
know, if you're in the general fund like
[2:07:02] Ann's right here, she's in the general
fund. She doesn't keep a balance. That
[2:07:08] rolls back up to our general fund
reserve, but it's a little different.
[2:07:12] » Yeah. Candace,
>> go ahead. Go ahead, Andy.
[2:07:17] » Oh, um, I was gonna say, is that like a
good talking point for um the convert
[2:07:22] like converse uh questions we get as
well when people are like, "Oh, well,
[2:07:27] you didn't spend any money on snow
plowing this winter, so why aren't my
[2:07:31] roads getting paved?" Is that kind of
like the same way you'd want to talk
[2:07:35] about that as well?
>> Yeah. I can't take money that was And
[2:07:39] that's not how dual budgets work. I
can't take money that was appropriated
[2:07:42] for one purpose. You guys did a
supplemental. We appropriated a certain
[2:07:46] amount of money for grooming, whatever,
whatever it is you appropriated for. I
[2:07:51] don't get to go plunk it in another fund
and use it for a different purpose. Uh
[2:07:55] you'd have to amend the budget at that
juncture to do that. You can do that. Um
[2:08:01] but if we haven't spent money on
something, it just goes right back into
[2:08:04] our fund balance. So at the end of 25
um we had a couple million I can't
[2:08:13] remember exact the exact amount without
looking at a fund balance for the end of
[2:08:16] last year that we didn't spend and we do
that every year we bring in revenues so
[2:08:21] we will plan to spend them something
changes or you know we didn't fill every
[2:08:25] position we thought we would fill that
happens every year uh and then that
[2:08:29] rolls back up into our savings account
and is available for use in the next
[2:08:33] year should something come up that or
that we want to invest in like landfill.
[2:08:39] So that I think that is important for
people to understand.
[2:08:45] » So Michael, I remember last year we were
talking about your bath plant and you
[2:08:50] had some machinery that you thought you
could get working on. That's not
[2:08:54] happening anymore. That's not possible.
>> Um no, cuz I put like 30 grand in the
[2:08:58] budget to start working on that and
start building it up. Um,
[2:09:05] this asphalt contractor said he just
rebuilt one like ours and it cost him $3
[2:09:09] million.
>> Got it.
[2:09:11] » I I need $33 million for something else,
not an asphalt. Not saying that it's not
[2:09:17] a good idea to get it that way, but you
know, I think we need a land more than
[2:09:22] » Yeah. And so, in the future, where will
we get our asphalt? Um, you know, unless
[2:09:28] that we have somebody using a pit close
in in the county like ours or even ACAs
[2:09:34] where we can buy it from them, it's get
going out of the county to purchase it.
[2:09:37] » Okay.
>> I don't like that, but
[2:09:41] » it's like a two-hour trip to go to BB to
get asphalt.
[2:09:46] » Wow.
>> Keep the operators.
[2:09:50] You got two out right now.
>> Yeah. keeping a crew that I can help pay
[2:09:55] with cuz I got two that are out sick
right now. One just got out of the
[2:09:58] hospital the other day.
>> Unfortunately, the same problem I had.
[2:10:02] » Um,
so it's really been really tough this
[2:10:06] year to, you know, keep moving forward
with stuff. I was planning on being
[2:10:10] paving by June 1st.
>> Yeah,
[2:10:12] » they put it off to the 20th. They put it
off to the 1st of July and we just
[2:10:17] started paving like two weeks ago. Okay.
Control part of the willow fire.
[2:10:23] » Y
>> and you couldn't get to the pitch that
[2:10:26] was in an evacuation zone. So they
couldn't get there.
[2:10:31] » Does ACA ever make asphalt regularly or
do they need a contract from the state
[2:10:36] or somebody else?
>> Um yeah. No, they make ACA makes asphalt
[2:10:40] regularly but they don't make it up
here. Right.
[2:10:42] » They need a contract from the state to
make it up here. Yeah.
[2:10:46] » They make it all the time.
A lot of times in the winter time down
[2:10:51] there, too.
>> Yes.
[2:10:53] » Where we can
>> they just like to know in advance how
[2:10:56] much.
[2:11:00] » Wow. That's two trucks every two hours
trying to pave.
[2:11:04] » Yeah. Miles of road.
>> And if I only have two drivers, that's a
[2:11:07] long day.
[2:11:11] » Goodness,
>> that is slow.
[2:11:12] » So, this week we're not paving. Um, we
plan to pick it up next week, but then
[2:11:17] the following week, the guys are out of
town at a conference.
[2:11:21] » I'm staying in town, but
[2:11:26] » Wow.
>> It's hard to believe that it's September
[2:11:30] already,
>> is it?
[2:11:32] » I did also,
>> um, also on the website there, there are
[2:11:37] service requests. There's a a place you
can go to service request. Mhm.
[2:11:42] » Anybody can put a service request in
anytime. If there's a pothole that needs
[2:11:46] to be filled that we don't see because
we didn't drive that road for a while.
[2:11:51] » Um, put a service request in. It's
trackable so I can make sure that the
[2:11:56] guys get it done. Um, I know we do that
a lot people putting requests.
[2:12:02] » Where where's the service request? On
the website.
[2:12:04] » It's on Yeah, it's under public works.
>> Okay.
[2:12:06] » And actually, there's a bunch of tabs
all over for that service request.
[2:12:11] » Got it. It's on the first page where the
departments are. I think it's underneath
[2:12:15] public works, but it's clickable there.
>> Okay.
[2:12:18] » Well, cool. That's good information.
That's that's great.
[2:12:21] » And you know, maybe we weren't plowing
this winter, but we were doing a lot of
[2:12:25] potholes.
>> Um, we did do a lot of other work like
[2:12:29] signage
um all over the county.
[2:12:34] » That wasn't Oh, I'm sorry. That wasn't
me saying that. That was just questions
[2:12:39] I get from the the community. I know you
guys were working your butts off all
[2:12:43] winter.
>> We we had several people call us on
[2:12:45] that.
>> Yeah.
[2:12:48] » Do you guys re use that rock uh
the stuff from Wyoming that comes in a
[2:12:54] bag? Is it called rock sal?
>> Rock asphalt.
[2:12:57] » We we do have we have been using some of
that especially in the winter time.
[2:13:01] » Yeah.
>> Gets kind of expensive. I can get you
[2:13:03] know stuff cheaper in Denver.
>> Yeah. But I like that because it's got a
[2:13:08] three-year warranty and I'm waiting to
use that threeear warranty up there. But
[2:13:11] it seems like the asphalt keeps breaking
out around that and not that material.
[2:13:17] » Would that work well in the cracks on
the millboard?
[2:13:21] » Um it could
>> rock asphalt. How do you apply it? Do
[2:13:25] you just shovel it in
>> and then tamp it down? Um you don't have
[2:13:28] to do anything else with that cuz it's
asphalt. It's rock. It's impregnated
[2:13:32] with asphalt.
>> Yeah.
[2:13:33] » Naturally. And they they mine it with
that in there. And so it sets up really
[2:13:39] nice.
>> They did the big one by Grand West
[2:13:45] sign in Grand West in the highway.
>> Big one.
[2:13:49] » The Rockwell guy put that out there.
Filled that hole for a test.
[2:13:58] » Yeah. He's proud of us.
>> He is. Do you do you guys remember about
[2:14:02] how much that was a bag and what kind of
minimums were needed to order a batch of
[2:14:07] that?
>> Um, it cost me for um a China cost me
[2:14:12] $1,700.
But that I don't pay shipping on that or
[2:14:16] anything where if I go to Denver to get
15 tons, it's about $2,000
[2:14:21] and we go through 15 tons pretty quick
and it comes back out. We replace it.
[2:14:25] » Pick that up.
>> We have to pick it up. Mhm. So, got an
[2:14:29] operator on the truck.
>> So, it's one ton for 1,700 or 15 tons
[2:14:34] for
>> three grand, something like that.
[2:14:38] » Wow. What are we going to do?
>> We go to Denver quite a bit.
[2:14:42] » Yeah.
>> And it comes in bags.
[2:14:45] » Um Yeah, that does. We, you know, um
they deliver it that way.
[2:14:48] » Wow.
>> And it it shovels out. I'm not quite
[2:14:53] sure how the mechanics of it work.
>> Yeah. because you can shovel it out of
[2:14:57] the bag under the ground and then pack
it and it's it's back in there.
[2:15:00] » That's cool.
>> And we were told not to use any
[2:15:02] mechanical
>> means of doing it like compactor or
[2:15:07] anything.
>> Wow.
[2:15:10] » Would that work on somebody's dirt
driveway? Could you spread it out?
[2:15:13] » I don't know. You probably could. It
might be a little bit expensive to get
[2:15:16] here, but I mean that's what they use in
Texas on their highways, so they just
[2:15:20] roll it out on the highway.
>> Wow. Cool.
[2:15:32] » Well, great. Thank you for the updates.
Anybody else have questions for
[2:15:37] » Roaden Bridge?
>> No questions for me. It's one of my
[2:15:41] favorite subjects, though. Just going to
say that.
[2:15:45] » I will say that County Road 10 coming
off the Twin Lakes is rugged.
[2:15:51] » It is. And I I don't like driving that
one no more myself. I usually take 24.
[2:15:56] Even though it's got some bad spots,
too. And that's why on the on the map
[2:15:59] it's got some patches on it, too.
They're hard to places that are pretty
[2:16:03] bad.
>> I have a question that's not road
[2:16:07] related. Just since you're here,
Michael,
[2:16:10] um do you think it's possible like that
Dutch Henry project will happen this
[2:16:14] year?
>> I'm pushing it really hard.
[2:16:16] » Okay. He's working on the permit for the
um
[2:16:21] core of engineers right now.
>> Okay.
[2:16:26] » I've already checked that the pipe is
still available at ACA.
[2:16:30] » Great.
>> They'll deliver it and we just have to
[2:16:32] install it as soon as we get the permit.
>> That's awesome.
[2:16:35] » That's something that could happen
later, you know, even in October as long
[2:16:38] as it doesn't freeze up.
>> Yeah. And it's just we've been trying to
[2:16:42] make it happen so that the college the
construction comes in the first semester
[2:16:48] » can help work on that.
>> Yeah.
[2:16:49] » Right.
>> That's great.
[2:16:51] » That would be great. That would just
that would be so awesome.
[2:16:55] » I met with Ben about it last week and
updated him on the
[2:17:01] » Thanks y'all.
>> And the permit. We just don't know when
[2:17:04] when
>> Yeah. Then he'll go.
[2:17:08] » We'll just wait. Okay.
>> I mean, could we ask a
[2:17:13] representative or senator to check in on
that and push it along?
[2:17:18] » Yeah. Do you have any relationships
you'd like to
[2:17:22] » Yeah. I mean, Britney Patterson's up
here all the time.
[2:17:24] » They're constantly like, "What can we
do? How can we help everybody?"
[2:17:27] » Yeah.
>> Um,
[2:17:31] who's it with? Who's the the Army Corp
of Engineers is with the
[2:17:35] the State Department? No,
>> it's
[2:17:38] » Army.
>> No, I know the state. Sorry. Which
[2:17:41] department in the federal government?
>> Department of Defense.
[2:17:44] » Yeah,
>> I was close, y'all. State Department's
[2:17:47] pretty close.
>> Department of Defense.
[2:17:50] » Isn't that the Department of War?
>> Yeah.
[2:17:52] » Absolutely not. Absolutely not.
>> Something like that.
[2:17:56] » Department
offices in Canyon City.
[2:18:00] » Oh, really?
>> Yeah. They have like one person, one to
[2:18:04] two people that work there. That's why
it takes so long to go through all the
[2:18:08] permitting.
>> It's really capacity issues. It's hard.
[2:18:12] » We have to work with them all the time.
>> They're just under a lot of capacity
[2:18:17] constraints.
>> Oh, I think that's a great idea to reach
[2:18:21] out to Britney.
>> Yeah, I was going to ask Bennett.
[2:18:26] » Oh, Michael Bennett.
>> Just cuz Delaney is up there. Okay,
[2:18:29] whoever. Does it matter who I ask?
>> Doesn't ask them all. Can you send me
[2:18:33] the permit number so I can be really
explicit?
[2:18:38] » They go around.
>> Great idea, Elsa.
[2:18:41] » Also, maybe it would impel him to like
get more funding to that department,
[2:18:47] too, you know. Okay, cool. If you could
get me the permit number, I'll reach
[2:18:52] out.
Thank you.
[2:18:58] And I'll cite our seasonal
trickiness
[2:19:03] » and how the timeline
>> our time. Yeah. Snow makes us
[2:19:08] » months of three construction months a
year.
[2:19:10] » Yeah.
>> And hopefully that's true this year. I
[2:19:13] don't want to say that, but hopefully we
get more snow this year.
[2:19:17] It could also be helpful to site the
partnership between CMC because we're
[2:19:21] intending to do the cowork installation
but then we have like a whole student
[2:19:25] program it's going to help up the dirt
work so on workforce development
[2:19:31] » on it.
>> Brilliant.
[2:19:34] » Thank you Elsa.
[2:19:38] » All right keep your head up bridge.
>> Oh yeah.
[2:19:42] This is right.
>> Thanks and w
[2:19:46] can't imagine miles.
>> I don't I don't I don't question it at
[2:19:51] all because I almost get rear ended
every time I go to check con.
[2:19:56] » I don't either. It's right outside of
Safeway. I think it was probably a
[2:19:59] sheriff's truck. I've been in an
emergency but between the stoplight on
[2:20:06] the highway and Harrison Avenue, they
were going to
[2:20:12] That's scary.
[2:20:17] » We have 10 minutes before the next topic
if
[2:20:20] » Yeah. Should we take a little uh
>> point of privilege?
[2:20:23] » Great. That's great.
[2:20:30] » All right. We'll be back at 1:30.
>> Thank you, staff.
[2:20:43] Shall we continue?
>> Item number two,
[2:20:48] overview and discussion regarding the
Lake County Gateway Mobility Plan. This
[2:20:52] will be led by Ann Schneider, our
community planning and development
[2:20:55] director.
>> Thank you so much. Um so in the packet
[2:21:00] of information that we provided you this
is kind of a legacy project um that was
[2:21:05] championed by um the previous board of
county commissioners Jeff Beer. So, you
[2:21:10] know, we've actually invited Jeff in to
kind of just educate us on kind of what
[2:21:15] the thoughts were that informed applying
for this grant and, you know, largely it
[2:21:21] was um wanted to be utilized and
leveraged to be able to kind of have a
[2:21:26] seat at the table um and be competitive
to get our projects in line with COT. Um
[2:21:33] uh Jeff mentioned noticing that um a
substantial amount of planning work
[2:21:38] needs to be done in order to be
competitive um for range planning um
[2:21:45] with CDOT. And so, um, in applying the
for the grant, we were awarded roughly
[2:21:50] just a little over $933,000
to do this this planning work, um,
[2:21:56] that's really been focused on safety and
mobility, some um, traffic calming in
[2:22:03] um, our gateway areas both at the
intersection of 91 and 24, as well as
[2:22:07] extending down into our busiest county
intersection at County Road um, 17 and
[2:22:14] Popular. um looking at um kind of
connecting um increasing safety and
[2:22:21] connecting our communities um in the
Mountain Valley estates east and west
[2:22:26] and then looking at our um southern
entrance into the community at McQuey
[2:22:31] and um Highway 24 South as well as um
the potential there was kind of an
[2:22:40] add-on and we've had a lot of discussion
for several years about funding and
[2:22:46] creating a bypass road to take off the
pressures of our downtown main street
[2:22:52] area and just all of the associated
safety concerns that we have in that
[2:22:56] area. So this study also looked at the
possibility of looking at um adding that
[2:23:03] connectivity in different locations in
and around um the county and the city of
[2:23:09] where could we potentially uh create a
effective bypass. Um so that just kind
[2:23:15] of leads into a little bit of the
history and why. So, we're at a point
[2:23:20] that uh we've engaged with uh DJNA as
our consultant to our traffic experts
[2:23:26] and Bill uh Delo is here with us today
um to just present to you the outcome of
[2:23:33] the feasibility study that was
contracted. Um once we get through that
[2:23:38] presentation um with Bill leading that
we're going to talk a little bit about
[2:23:42] we have a surplus of funds left actually
a considerable amount of surplus of
[2:23:47] funds left um that we can utilize then
to go into um what we've got proposed is
[2:23:54] is uh some future um uh work that would
make us even more competitive that we're
[2:24:00] hopeful in um contending for being in
the running to get on C do DOT schedule
[2:24:06] for these improvements um within our
community. So, we're going to talk about
[2:24:10] that. We'll jump back in. Um but unless
you have any questions for staff, I'd
[2:24:16] love to turn it over to Bill and let him
walk us through the um outcome of the
[2:24:22] feasibility study thus far.
>> Yeah. Um this is also part funded by
[2:24:30] GPR. So, that's very important thing to
get in front of them. Um funding is
[2:24:36] planning to move forward with
implementation. So we are see to
[2:24:44] move this forward.
>> Right. And um I think that Mark talked
[2:24:48] about this with you when he did
that's joining us now. You know just
[2:24:52] we've been working um with him to just
kind of understand the history of the
[2:24:58] work and and where we're at and and kind
of next steps. So we'll be sharing that
[2:25:02] afterwards. So, thank you, Michael, for
that and bringing that kind of into the
[2:25:07] equation.
[2:25:11] » Welcome, guys.
Go ahead, whoever's first.
[2:25:17] » Great. Thank you. Yes, as Ann mentioned,
Bill DLO with DJNA and I'll be walking
[2:25:22] through a presentation here shortly that
provides an overview of the planning
[2:25:26] work we've done to date on the gateways
mobility study. Um, with me today I have
[2:25:31] Mike Dagler who's also with DJNA. He was
our lead engineer um on the project and
[2:25:36] so he'll be here and available to help
me answer any questions that you might
[2:25:40] have um after we present. I do need to
get um permission to share my
[2:25:47] presentation.
>> Okay.
[2:25:50] » Absolutely.
>> Yeah.
[2:25:55] » Okay. You should have permission.
>> All right.
[2:26:05] Okay.
So, yes, once again, thanks um for the
[2:26:10] opportunity to be here today and present
uh on the gateways mobility plan. uh
[2:26:16] really happy to share the uh the work
that we've been doing uh on this project
[2:26:20] with you all and talk a little bit about
the the recommendations and then that'll
[2:26:24] certainly set the stage more for Ann and
team to talk a bit more about the
[2:26:29] potential next steps on the project.
So start off provide an overview of the
[2:26:35] study objectives. There were three
primary objectives um as part of this
[2:26:39] study. first was identifying uh
potential multimodal improvements that
[2:26:43] would serve uh users of all ages uh and
abilities and we focus in as Ann
[2:26:49] mentioned and we'll walk through in the
presentation three areas um within the
[2:26:54] county and within the city of Leadville
um as uh particular um locations of need
[2:26:59] u where we really focused our study
efforts. We evaluated and uh then
[2:27:04] recommended different alternatives for
each one of these locations really to
[2:27:08] address the needs that were identified
through our technical analysis as well
[2:27:13] as the needs that were identified uh by
the community through the engagement
[2:27:18] effort uh that we undertook as part of
this process. And we up to this date
[2:27:23] have prepared uh very conceptual level
uh diagrams for the preferred
[2:27:28] alternatives in each location. and we'll
be walking through um each of those um
[2:27:33] preferred concepts here within the
presentation.
[2:27:37] So, as we mentioned, there were four
distinct uh focus areas for this study.
[2:27:42] Uh first was up in Mountain View Village
northwest of town uh in that location.
[2:27:48] We'll walk through some of the
challenges in in that area, but the
[2:27:51] community is biseected by US 24. So it
creates challenges in terms of uh being
[2:27:56] able to uh cross the highway to get from
one part of the community to the other
[2:28:01] and being able to do so in a in a safe
manner. Uh we also looked at the
[2:28:06] northern gateway area. This is the area
around Safeway and then as US 24
[2:28:10] continues up to the intersection uh with
Highway 91. Third, we looked at the
[2:28:17] Colorado Mountain College area,
specifically the intersection of US 24
[2:28:21] with College Road and McQuei. Uh, this
is a location where there's an existing
[2:28:26] crosswalk, uh, rapid flashing beacon.
Uh, but there's still challenges with
[2:28:30] people being able to cross the highway
safely. Uh, we do, um, and heard through
[2:28:35] the community engagement observations
around um, high traffic speeds along US
[2:28:40] 24 in this location. uh and there are a
lot of challenges with the sanitation
[2:28:44] district dump station located near the
intersection and queuing that's
[2:28:47] generated uh by that facility. And then
as Ann noted, the the fourth component
[2:28:52] of this study was uh taking an initial
look and evaluating the potential
[2:28:57] feasibility for uh an alternative truck
bypass route that would help to reduce
[2:29:02] uh truck volumes through downtown.
[2:29:07] So, starting off in the Mountain View
Village area, uh walk through each of
[2:29:12] the the four project areas. We'll talk a
little bit about existing conditions in
[2:29:16] each location and then the uh potential
recommendations uh for each location
[2:29:20] after that. So, with Mountain View
Village, as I mentioned earlier, US 24
[2:29:25] bisects the community. So, you have
about half the twothirds of the
[2:29:29] community on the west side of the
highway and another third of it on the
[2:29:32] east side. there's no uh designated p
pedestrian crossing uh across the
[2:29:37] highway. So uh residents if they want to
get from one side of the community to
[2:29:42] the other are kind of on their own for
crossing the highway where wherever they
[2:29:45] may want to. Uh and as you can see from
the exhibit, there's a a pretty good
[2:29:50] curve in the highway that limits
visibility both for drivers and
[2:29:53] pedestrians. Uh so it doesn't make that
crossing of the highway um very easy or
[2:29:58] very safe. Additionally, one item that
was highlighted through the engagement
[2:30:02] and through our analysis is there's a
fair number of people who would like to
[2:30:06] be able to walk or bike into town and
there's no existing facilities along uh
[2:30:11] highway 24 to make that connection. So,
a lot of people currently today walk in
[2:30:16] the uh the shoulder of the highway in
the dirt adjacent to the pavement.
[2:30:24] So, we looked at several different
options for this location in terms of
[2:30:27] being able to address the uh the
crossing with pedestrians. Um reviewed
[2:30:32] these options as well um with C dot just
for an initial kind of gut reaction uh
[2:30:38] to the potential for different um
improvements. So, I'll walk through them
[2:30:41] and talk about what some of the uh the
potential next steps would be here. So,
[2:30:46] the first item that we looked at or
first option that we looked at was would
[2:30:49] be an atgrade crossing. So, this would
end up having a marked crosswalk that
[2:30:55] would connect uh the two sides of the
community together, which we've shown
[2:30:59] here in about the middle of the exhibit.
Uh this crosswalk, you know, in and of
[2:31:04] itself can exist on it own its own. It
needs some sort of um protection,
[2:31:09] traffic control of some sort given the
volumes on the highway and the uh the
[2:31:13] speed of traffic. So, we've identified
that that crosswalk could either be
[2:31:18] controlled by a um rapid flashing
beacon, which is similar to what is in
[2:31:23] place along US 24 down by Colorado
Mountain College today, or what's called
[2:31:28] a pedestrian hybrid beacon, which is the
the overhead lights that turn uh solid
[2:31:33] red and then flashing red uh when
pedestrians are are crossing uh a
[2:31:38] particular crosswalk in the
intersection. So we've talked about uh
[2:31:42] those different treatments with C dot a
few of the items that they highlighted
[2:31:46] um for these to be feasible. One would
be um changing and kind of communicating
[2:31:50] a bit of a change in the uh the highway
environment. So having drivers expect
[2:31:55] that there might be pedestrians in this
location. So, also on this exhibit,
[2:31:59] you'll see we've shown locations in
orange here for new sidewalks. Um, in
[2:32:04] kind of the pink or purple color here in
the the middle where we would have a new
[2:32:08] median, raised median that would be
present in the highway and then a
[2:32:12] sidewalk on the uh the east side of the
highway as well to communicate to
[2:32:17] drivers hopefully slow traffic as well
uh but to anticipate that there may be
[2:32:22] uh pedestrians and then that crossing
device may be activated. In addition to
[2:32:27] those treatments in those locations, we
also have proposed in this concept uh
[2:32:31] fencing along the south side of the
highway to direct pedestrians to cross
[2:32:36] at the crosswalk so that they utilize
that infrastructure u for the purpose
[2:32:40] that it was implemented for. Uh and then
additional signing both um westbound and
[2:32:45] eastbound on Highway 24 in advance of
the crossing to alert drivers to the
[2:32:50] presence of the crossing. uh and then
also to activate ahead of time those
[2:32:54] signs, those warning signs when there's
a pedestrian in the crosswalk. So that's
[2:33:00] option one really identified as a lower
cost and nearer term uh improvement.
[2:33:06] Option two for this location was uh
identified as the potential for an
[2:33:11] underpass under US 24. So here on the
east side of the community, the the
[2:33:16] highway starts to generally and
gradually go up in elevation and so
[2:33:21] there's opportunity to potentially put
in an underpass underneath the highway
[2:33:25] using kind of the the natural grade of
the terrain in this location. Uh and
[2:33:30] then we would have a grade separated or
separated pedestrian crossing under the
[2:33:35] highway to be able to connect uh the two
communities together. Within the plan,
[2:33:39] we identified this uh undercrossing. You
know, certainly acknowledged it as a
[2:33:44] more expensive option and something that
could be uh analyze potentially more as
[2:33:49] a long-term improvement for this
location.
[2:33:54] And then the uh the other item that I'll
identify here in terms of
[2:33:57] recommendations is down here in the
green is a new multi-use path that would
[2:34:02] connect the uh Mountain View Village
down to the northern gateway area. And
[2:34:07] as we go through a few slides um here
further into the presentation we'll
[2:34:12] provide a little bit more detail but we
are showing the uh the connection for
[2:34:15] that and then both options both the uh
at grade crossing with the sidewalks or
[2:34:21] the underpass would then connect both
sides of the community to that that
[2:34:25] multi-use pathway.
[2:34:30] Right. So then we jump down to the
northern gateway areas. We mentioned
[2:34:34] this area covers um the area here um
Mountain View Drive by the Safeway
[2:34:40] » up along US 24.
>> Okay, just
[2:34:43] » I will die. Thank you.
>> Sorry. All right.
[2:34:47] » No, no problem. Um and then up here to
the intersection uh with Highway 91
[2:34:53] within the uh the concepts and as we
walk through these other concepts um C
[2:34:57] DOT did share the concept plan for the
roundabout at that intersection of uh US
[2:35:03] 24 and Highway 91. And so we've
superimposed that initial concept um
[2:35:08] onto our plans just so we can make sure
that we were planning with the the
[2:35:12] ultimate configuration of that
intersection and didn't propose anything
[2:35:15] that potentially conflicted with with C
do DOT's plan in that location. So, US
[2:35:21] 24 and the the intersections here today
are very autooriented uh very much
[2:35:26] focused on serving automobile traffic,
but the uh character of this uh area
[2:35:31] within town is changing quite a bit with
the railard development going to bring a
[2:35:35] lot significant number of new residents
to this area, a lot more pedestrian and
[2:35:40] bike activity. And so we focused uh our
recommendations and concepts around
[2:35:46] serving those uh additional uh
pedestrians and cyclists that will be
[2:35:50] coming with the new development. We also
um spent some focused time on the
[2:35:55] existing bus stop that's currently
located um kind of within the uh the
[2:35:59] drive aisle or parking lot for the uh
Safeway and looking at ways to enhance
[2:36:04] that bus stop, relocate it and put in a
location that where more amenities could
[2:36:09] be provided for riders and it would be
uh more accessible for uh individuals
[2:36:14] especially from the intersection of
Mountain View Drive and US 24.
[2:36:20] So, this slide shows uh some of the
proposed improvements. We have the in
[2:36:24] green here, the multi-use path
connecting in from the the south side of
[2:36:28] US 24 in Mountain View Village. There is
an existing sidewalk along the west side
[2:36:33] of the roadway here um which we have
identified could potentially be widened
[2:36:38] um to the full width of a multi-use path
at least 10 feet wide to provide for
[2:36:42] two-way traffic for cyclists and
pedestrians. We then identified a series
[2:36:47] of improvements at the intersection,
mostly focused on enhancing the existing
[2:36:51] crosswalks, either adding additional
crosswalks or refreshing the striping on
[2:36:55] those crosswalks, uh, and making sure
that the, uh, pedestrians who are
[2:37:00] crossing at the intersection there can
do so in a safe and convenient manner.
[2:37:05] We looked at several different potential
locations to relocate the existing bus
[2:37:09] stop based upon uh available space
within the uh the roadway, available
[2:37:15] rideway and where the uh the buses are
heading. And then down here at the south
[2:37:20] end, we propose continuing that
multi-use trail along the uh the east
[2:37:25] side of the roadway so that it's able to
serve the railard development and
[2:37:29] ultimately connect to the mineral belt
trail to the south.
[2:37:34] And then here on this slide, we show the
uh full connection, full extent of the
[2:37:39] proposed multi-use trail between the
Northern Gateway uh and Mountain View
[2:37:44] Village. This trail is proposed to be
located on the south side of US 24 would
[2:37:49] be about two and a quarter miles uh in
length uh and would
[2:37:56] here we've shown down here a transition
where it would stay on the south and
[2:38:00] west side of the roadway where the
roundabout is developed some different
[2:38:04] concepts to ensure that there's the
ability for uh pedestrians and cyclists
[2:38:09] to cross on the west leg of the
intersection and be able to access uh
[2:38:13] Mountain Valley Estates and other
properties here uh to the north of US 24
[2:38:18] on the west side of Highway 91 as well.
[2:38:25] Then also wanted to touch on the uh the
concept for the uh the bus stop. So
[2:38:29] we've shown that here uh a potential
proposed concept. So, the existing bus
[2:38:34] bus stop is up here in the uh upper
leftand corner of this image where
[2:38:38] there's an existing uh power pole in the
uh the middle of the uh entrance to the
[2:38:44] parking lot and the bus stop is signed
um by this power pole. In this concept,
[2:38:49] we've proposed extending the existing
sidewalk from the intersection on the
[2:38:53] north side of Mountain View Drive,
creating a bus pull out and a full bus
[2:38:59] stop along the sidewalk, which could
include benches, a shelter as well, um,
[2:39:03] if desired, and a more convenient and
safer waiting space um, for bus
[2:39:09] passengers that's outside of the uh, the
drive aisle and traffic operations
[2:39:14] within the uh, the Safeway parking lot.
We also show the u refreshed and new
[2:39:19] striping for the crosswalks here at the
intersection with US 24 and mountain
[2:39:23] view as well on this exhibit.
So I'll jump now down to the third
[2:39:29] location, Colorado Mountain College. So
we focused in this location primarily on
[2:39:34] the intersection here, McQuey College
Road and US 24. As mentioned, there is
[2:39:39] the existing crosswalk that is uh
controlled by a rapid flashing beacon
[2:39:43] here on the west side of the
intersection. Uh but traffic is free
[2:39:47] flowing along US 24. The speed limit in
this location is along the highway is 35
[2:39:52] miles per hour, but certainly in field
reviews we've done, what we've heard
[2:39:56] from the community is a fair amount of
traffic does seem to travel at a higher
[2:40:01] speed in this location, especially in
the uh the west or southbound direction.
[2:40:05] As people are heading out of town, the
roadway starts to kind of go down in
[2:40:10] elevation as you start to go out of
town. And so people start to pick up
[2:40:13] speed as they're uh moving out of
downtown and moving um to the south.
[2:40:19] There are a few other items that we
wanted to uh to point out uh with this
[2:40:23] is the uh mineral belt trail here
crosses US 24 here to the west, but
[2:40:27] there's no marked uh crossing in this
location. Uh so it's a midblock crossing
[2:40:32] that uh is not marked. Um, ideally folks
would travel up and make this crossing
[2:40:37] here where the beacon controls it, but
it takes folks quite a bit out of their
[2:40:42] way. There isn't necessarily a sidewalk
along the highway, so there's not a lot
[2:40:46] of compliance with that um movement and
and making that diversion. And then, as
[2:40:51] we mentioned, the existing dump station
here with the sanitation district
[2:40:55] located right just adjacent to the
roadway. Um, really enough room for one
[2:41:00] vehicle, one vehicle with a trailer or
an RV. uh and that tends to cause uh
[2:41:04] queuing either onto US 24 or over here
on Quincy Street east.
[2:41:11] So there were two options and two uh
alternatives that we identified as
[2:41:15] potentials uh for this location. The
first would be to signalize the
[2:41:19] intersection of US 24 College of Mathy,
add full crosswalks in that location uh
[2:41:25] as well. And then as part of both
options, we propose to realign the
[2:41:31] mineral belt trail uh to encourage and
direct users to cross at the
[2:41:37] intersection. Within this concept here,
we've shown the uh the trail here along
[2:41:42] the south side of US 24. There's also
the potential concept where the trail
[2:41:47] could cross here to the south kind of at
the south end of the exhibit and connect
[2:41:51] in with the trail that connects up to
the college and then directing users
[2:41:55] here along the west side of college
road. That is an option where if we did
[2:41:59] go to a greater level of design uh for
this concept, we could look at both of
[2:42:04] those options in a bit more detail. We
then have shown in purple here just kind
[2:42:09] of in general terms um the proposed
sanitation districts uh concept to
[2:42:14] relocate uh their facilities and the
dump station to create uh more room for
[2:42:18] queuing to happen off street.
So we also looked at the a concept with
[2:42:25] a roundabout at this intersection and
within the plan this concept is the uh
[2:42:29] identified or recommended preferred
alternative uh to implement a roundabout
[2:42:33] in this location. uh same treatments as
before with the realignment of the
[2:42:38] mineral belt trail. Uh the
implementation of the sanit sanitation
[2:42:42] district's proposals for a a
reconfigured facility. Uh and then the
[2:42:46] crossing for the trail on the west leg
of the intersection here. U we did talk
[2:42:52] with COT at least in a preliminary basis
about the potential of the roundabout. I
[2:42:56] think in general C dot was open to the
concept. There does need to be some
[2:43:00] additional analysis to look at and
ensure that the roundabout would operate
[2:43:04] appropriately given traffic conditions
and that it would be uh designed to
[2:43:08] accommodate all of the different
vehicles in terms of trucks and
[2:43:11] emergency vehicles in this location. But
at least as a general concept, um C do
[2:43:16] was open to studying the concept uh
further in this location.
[2:43:23] And then finally, I'll walk through uh
the examination we did with the uh the
[2:43:28] truck bypass alternatives. Uh this
exhibit shows the various different
[2:43:32] routes and alternatives that we looked
at. There were six in total. Uh so
[2:43:38] starting here at the top in the dark
blue, uh we looked at an alternative
[2:43:41] that used county road 99. um along with
additional roadways, County Road 9 here
[2:43:47] uh down to the south connecting to
Highway 300 and then intersecting US 24
[2:43:52] down here at the south with that
connection. So really kind of keeping uh
[2:43:56] truck traffic as far west as possible um
of town. Uh the next option here is in
[2:44:03] the pink um which utilizes a very
similar alignment up here along County
[2:44:07] Road 5A and then County Road 9 and then
cuts across on Mountain View Drive um
[2:44:13] over to where the Safeway in Northern
Gateway area is to reconnect with US 24.
[2:44:18] There's then the uh the green route
which again follows County Road 5 and
[2:44:23] then follows County Road 4 uh east
across town and then makes that
[2:44:28] connection in the Northern Gateway. Then
in the dark green, we use uh an
[2:44:32] alternative that uses McQuey uh and then
makes the connection um up and avoiding
[2:44:38] downtown. And then in the red is the
current alignment along US 24. And then
[2:44:43] over here, the final option here in
purple um utilizes US 24 till just south
[2:44:49] of downtown and then cuts across to the
east on County Road 8. um avoiding
[2:44:54] downtown but still running through
generally um the center of town uh to
[2:44:59] make that connection. Here we have shown
in blue um a location where there isn't
[2:45:05] an existing roadway but there could
potentially be um a future roadway that
[2:45:10] we discussed with public works at least
at a high level. Um so we've shown that
[2:45:14] at a as a dash line here that could make
that connection and avoid um some of the
[2:45:20] constraints that are present here along
County Road 5.
[2:45:24] So a few items that we wanted to point
out with the truck bypass alternatives.
[2:45:28] Um certainly as Ann mentioned, you know,
trucks today cause uh quite a bit of
[2:45:32] impact within downtown. Based upon se
dot traffic data, there's about 400
[2:45:37] heavy trucks on average a day that pass
through downtown along US 24. that's
[2:45:42] projected to grow to about 450 trucks
per day by 2040. So in the next 14 15
[2:45:48] years. Um but as we looked at these
different alternatives, all six of them,
[2:45:53] they all have different constraints and
in some cases very significant
[2:45:56] constraints. There's narrow travel
lanes, narrow roadways. Um there's no
[2:46:01] shoulders along many of the roadways. uh
many of the roadways the pavement
[2:46:05] condition the pavement cross-section is
not set up to have significant amounts
[2:46:09] of heavy truck traffic uh travel along
those roadways. So just from a a
[2:46:15] physical condition standpoint uh pretty
much all of the uh options that we
[2:46:20] looked at would need significant
improvements um to the roadway to the
[2:46:24] roadway shoulders the width of the
roadway and the pavement cross-section
[2:46:27] in order to be able to accommodate
increased uh truck traffic. Another key
[2:46:32] item, especially on the far west side
along County Road 5, are the existing
[2:46:37] bridges. They're not designed to
accommodate uh heavy volumes of trucks
[2:46:41] and heavy trucks with that. And so
there's uh significant either retrofit
[2:46:45] or replacement of those bridges that
would be required uh to be able to serve
[2:46:50] uh truck traffic. There's also on the
west side uh very significant potential
[2:46:55] wetland and wildlife habitat impacts. Um
you're getting outside of town into
[2:46:59] areas where there are existing wetlands.
there's a significant number of wildlife
[2:47:03] crossings that occur and so there's a a
good chance or a significant chance of
[2:47:08] potential conflicts with truck traffic
um and wildlife as well. Many of those
[2:47:14] alternatives also uh travel through
heavily residential areas within the
[2:47:18] county and within the town. And so there
are sign potentially significant um
[2:47:23] impacts related to to noise um with uh
trucks traveling so close to uh
[2:47:29] residential properties as well.
We did look um at a very high level
[2:47:34] based upon some of those alternatives or
those issues at the county road 9 or
[2:47:39] sorry county road 99 alternative which
is this uh dark blue line here. Uh and
[2:47:44] it based upon looking at those
constraints, the potential upgrades that
[2:47:48] might be needed could be anywhere from
25 to $60 million to be able to make
[2:47:53] that um alternative and that route um
acceptable uh as a truck route in terms
[2:47:58] of roadway width, pavement
cross-section, and mitigating um other
[2:48:02] potential impacts as well. We would
expect the the other options that we
[2:48:06] looked at and the other routes that we
looked at to have pretty similar cost
[2:48:09] ranges um as well. So, it's a pretty
significant um investment if it was
[2:48:14] something that would be uh pursued
further.
[2:48:18] And uh with that, I'll turn things over
back to to Ann to talk about a little
[2:48:22] bit of the uh potential next steps.
>> Thanks. And and I um also love to just
[2:48:30] kind of um take a break and see if the
commissioners have any questions. There
[2:48:37] was a lot of information. Um these next
steps are some um potential ways that we
[2:48:43] can continue to utilize um the funds um
that are in the grant. This is does have
[2:48:48] a 25% match. Um and so we just want to
kind of get an idea if you have that was
[2:48:55] a a lot of information. So seems like a
natural place to take pause and see if
[2:48:59] you have anything about what you've
heard thus far.
[2:49:04] » So the grant was over 900,000.
How much have we used so far?
[2:49:09] » So we've used just under 200,000 I
believe of that. So in in in just broad
[2:49:16] and I know Catherine's here is that what
we
[2:49:20] » Yes.
>> Well I I think the total is that we've
[2:49:23] used
[2:49:29] » so we we've got five surplus um to be
used in this planning. And so that's
[2:49:35] what we're going to talk about next.
Also just to clarify the grant itself
[2:49:39] like grant funding is 700,000.
It's the the 9333
[2:49:47] is is the total project cost
>> with the match.
[2:49:51] » Yeah. So the 25% match that we're
committed to if we use up all of that
[2:49:56] funding is 233
[2:50:00] um total. But so far we have only spent
like
[2:50:07] the 333 part of the um match commitment.
>> So if we continued if we used up all of
[2:50:14] the rest of the grant funding, we would
be committed to not quite 200 grand.
[2:50:24] » So the grant is a planning grant. It's
not a construction grant. Correct. So,
[2:50:29] so some of these next steps would be um
taking um those three study areas um
[2:50:36] Mountain View Village, Northern Gateway,
and um Con Mountain College, taking them
[2:50:41] to a 30% design
um and evaluating them in more detail.
[2:50:47] Um and so this just kind of goes through
all of the future work that can be done
[2:50:51] on those areas. the um early estimates
on this work on these three different
[2:50:58] stere uh study area areas would be
roughly $200,000
[2:51:02] um to look at at those and then um Oh
yeah,
[2:51:08] Mark has a question.
>> Mark from COT, you want to jump in
[2:51:12] there?
>> Sure. And I appreciate the commissioners
[2:51:17] uh allowing me in on this one.
I just I'm a little confused. So, are we
[2:51:25] finishing
what's being presented and talking about
[2:51:28] that before we move on or what do we
what what is the effort here? because I
[2:51:36] feel like we jumped from one to to
really talking about finishing this this
[2:51:42] section because honestly my concern my
one of my main concerns for joining
[2:51:47] today is making sure that the contract
Lake County has with DJNA
[2:51:56] is completed is have they are they doing
everything they're being asked is this
[2:52:02] because when I looked at the RFP I never
saw the contract and this was couple two
[2:52:07] three years ago when it was pushed
forward. Um I'm not sure what your
[2:52:13] contract with DJNA is and if this
completes it and so if this does then
[2:52:19] this needs to be tied up and and
finished and and then we can talk about
[2:52:24] potential next steps. Um because unless
they're contracted to move on and I'm
[2:52:30] not sure that they are. So, can we clear
that up with me real quick? What is is
[2:52:37] this the end of their contract?
And I don't know if they need to kind of
[2:52:42] I mean, if they if they need to finish
and if we want to finish discussing what
[2:52:46] they have presented cuz they still need
to like put a bow on this and present it
[2:52:51] and seed needs to get the documentation.
And there's a few things I wanted to
[2:52:55] talk about their presentation before we
jump to the next steps. But I mean I
[2:53:00] I'll follow along. I just wanted to
raise that concern.
[2:53:05] » Thank you, Mark.
>> Yeah, thank you so much, Mark. And I
[2:53:08] think I think you're absolutely right. I
think it's um you know, time to take a
[2:53:13] bit of a pause and look at the
information that's in front of you. And
[2:53:17] I think that we have um spent some time
trying to kind of research what the
[2:53:23] original RFP um in included and um
perhaps Bill, you can help us uh with
[2:53:30] this as well. I think that this would be
um and I think that Mark, we all met
[2:53:37] with you um and public works and DJNA
together to try to kind of sus that out.
[2:53:44] So, I'd love to hear um maybe from your
perspective, Mark, as well as um bills,
[2:53:50] if um where we're at right now. Um and
kind of fine-tuning this plan with input
[2:53:58] back from the board on direction. Um it
would be all inclusive of what the RFP
[2:54:06] was designed to do. So that's kind of
been our intent mark from you know
[2:54:11] staff's intent from kind of taking on
this project as a legacy piece from uh
[2:54:17] previous leadership.
[2:54:23] » Who can shed light on this RFP and what
it entails and is it coming to an end?
[2:54:28] Bill, can you help us with that? Yeah, I
would note um I think for for our scope
[2:54:33] of work that we have contracted with the
county uh the plan the draft plan that
[2:54:38] we presented here today was the primary
in deliverable um for that um scope of
[2:54:44] work. Uh so obviously any comments that
you all have here today um comments that
[2:54:51] may come from Mark or from C dot uh we
would have still a process we still have
[2:54:56] within our current scope of work um the
kind of addressing those comments making
[2:55:02] any updates to the documents to reflect
those and then finalizing that document
[2:55:07] and submitting it uh to the county. So,
as part of our base scope, it was
[2:55:11] preparing this plan and the uh concept
level uh designs that we have and that
[2:55:16] we've provided to the county. Um, but
our current scope did not include
[2:55:21] advancing anything further in design up
to maybe a 30% level or something.
[2:55:26] » All right, then that is that is exactly
what I wanted to hear. Thank you, Bill,
[2:55:30] for doing that. So then let's back up a
little bit and talk just if it's okay
[2:55:35] with the the county commissioners. Let's
talk about this and let's focus in on
[2:55:42] completing what Bill and DJNA has done
and put in some comments on that. That
[2:55:48] way they can kind of
get wrapped up. So, if you'll go back to
[2:55:53] at least I had a couple of questions
specifically of the trail along State
[2:55:58] Highway 22 24. Um,
yeah, there was the one that showed it
[2:56:04] all the way around. So, yeah. Yeah.
Okay. So, that is a really long trail
[2:56:10] and it looks like it flows all along Cot
right away. I just want to give Lake
[2:56:15] County a heads up that there's we're
getting a lot of these requests now from
[2:56:20] mountain communities where the road is
really tight. Our maintenance forces
[2:56:25] have a huge safety concern when it comes
to these type of things. One, we're not
[2:56:31] even sure how much rightway we really
have there. A lot of times when you're
[2:56:35] coming through these mountain easements,
it is mostly Forest Service e easement
[2:56:40] and the rightway can get really really
expensive just letting and this is just
[2:56:44] as an FYI. Um, also for safety concerns
in the winter when we have when we have
[2:56:51] snow, and I hope we do have snow, that
when the plows come through, I mean, if
[2:56:58] you look at the Glenwood Trail, the
Glenwood Canyon Trail, we close that
[2:57:03] about 6 months out of the year just
because plow drivers along, they can't
[2:57:08] be checking to to make sure people are
along there. and those rooster tails
[2:57:12] coming off the plow. And a lot of times
go, "Oh, this is a great little uh cross
[2:57:17] country ski trail, blah blah blah. We
can use this year round." This gets
[2:57:21] become really
a safety issue for our plow drivers
[2:57:25] because again, you just you never know
exactly what's going to be coming and
[2:57:31] and what the weather is and on and on.
We're having these issues even down in
[2:57:35] Grand Junction and Mesa County where
that we have the trail alongside the
[2:57:40] interstate and we can those rooster
tails can get thrown off pretty far into
[2:57:45] those bike trails. So just just be aware
this looks simple but not always. One of
[2:57:52] the other things when I was looking at
this is it can kind of come off right
[2:57:57] there at 99 and back around the backside
into town where there's less traffic.
[2:58:02] But anyway, that's something that can be
looked at down the road. I don't know if
[2:58:05] that was even considered, but that's
just one of the comments I wanted to
[2:58:10] make because our maintenance forces are
getting these requests and it's getting
[2:58:15] getting kind of touchy on that note. Um,
also when it comes to bypasses, I would
[2:58:22] strongly encourage Lake County and
Leadville to visit with Delta, the city
[2:58:28] of Delta and the city of Montro. They've
done some bypasses that have been fairly
[2:58:34] successful. They've had some Delta, the
city of Delta especially has had a
[2:58:38] little bit of trial on that.
Excellent opportunity for you guys to
[2:58:42] communicate with them and kind of get a
feel on what's worked, what hasn't, and
[2:58:47] what's still kind of working. Montro
worked really well. And in fact, what
[2:58:52] they ended up doing, they ended up
devolving the downtown. they're take
[2:58:57] they took over the downtown and we took
over the side street that became the
[2:59:01] bypass and again there's there's
potential along those those lines that
[2:59:06] really can be beneficial to the city of
Leadville. Um and so definitely
[2:59:13] encourage you to talk to and communicate
with Leadville on that that effort. Um,
[2:59:19] also if you do go down those roads, you
might want to look at state highway 13
[2:59:27] as it bypasses Rifle, not goes through
the town of Rifle, but bypasses
[2:59:33] they do. When we put that in, we
protected that um with some zoning
[2:59:38] because it is a three-way. We we spent
extra money to make that a three-way, so
[2:59:43] the speed limits could be a little
higher. And when that was built, there
[2:59:48] wasn't a building up around it. You
always want to protect that once you
[2:59:54] spend the money to do something like
that. That way, you don't have to
[2:59:56] continually cuz once you build a bypass,
businesses come, next thing you know,
[3:00:01] other businesses, other things come and
then they want to slow it down. That's
[3:00:05] not the purpose of a bypass or a
three-way. It's to get people or trucks
[3:00:10] or whatever. And then just be aware that
that can cause its own
[3:00:16] uh repro repro re repercussions
[3:00:23] and that's really other than that I
think what you guys did was a great plan
[3:00:27] layout. Um yeah highly compliment on on
the effort so far.
[3:00:36] Mark, I like what you said about,
you know, doing a a trail 99 that would
[3:00:43] actually connect to Leadville Junction,
which may be on the list for a trail
[3:00:49] down uh
one of the county roads from town. So, I
[3:00:53] I think that's smart.
>> It'd be a whole lot more scenic. I do
[3:00:57] know that it'd be a little shorter, a
little less expensive as far as that.
[3:01:01] And you know, maybe maybe a shorter
section trail along the state highway
[3:01:06] would be more palatable. You know, you
look at some of those curves as you look
[3:01:11] at this really long stretch.
It'd be in the shade a lot. It'd be
[3:01:17] there's just a lot of struggle on that.
I think especially around those around
[3:01:22] that hump. And so just just as an FYI, I
as I was looking at that on some other
[3:01:29] things, I really like that dropping off
at 99 and going around. That's how I
[3:01:34] would take a bike.
>> Is there another study studying the bike
[3:01:39] path from town down to the lake?
>> Um, so I think that's part of what is
[3:01:44] that the saber routes or is that going
to include that? I know that the trails
[3:01:48] coalition folks were looking at that and
direct was granted
[3:01:52] » a um grant to look at that um but we
have I I don't know what the status of
[3:01:58] that is
[3:02:01] right now to extend the trail that we
don't have right
[3:02:07] » so the study area was four to nine over
that way to the north side of
[3:02:12] » lake
[3:02:15] and so that
Pros had um initiated that with the
[3:02:19] trails coalition. They had worked um on
that and and we've been working with
[3:02:24] them, but we've had a bit of turnover.
So, I'm not sure where that project
[3:02:28] right now.
>> So, Bill and Mike, are you catching all
[3:02:33] this? It doesn't seem feasible that
we're going to get a bike path on that
[3:02:36] highway. It'd be better to take it 99 to
county road four and work with
[3:02:42] » Yeah, that's what it sounds like. And I
think that's something, yeah, we could
[3:02:45] certainly uh modify within the document,
modify this u this exhibit. Yeah. And
[3:02:50] highlight those issues. Yeah. That Mark
identified with it.
[3:02:54] » I think it's a good suggestion.
>> If we go to County Road 4, I just I just
[3:02:58] got to point out that it seems like once
again all of Leadville North gets
[3:03:03] circumvented by everything. There's, you
know, half a dozen neighborhoods out
[3:03:08] here and the kids have no way to get
into town. They're stuck on the side of
[3:03:13] Mountain View Road, which has no
shoulder, and people are constantly
[3:03:17] trying to walk or bike up and down this
road. Um, you know, it's it just feels
[3:03:23] like there's there's got to be at least
120 houses out here that have no way to
[3:03:27] get into town. And from bus routes to
proposed paths or sidewalks, it seems
[3:03:33] like everything in Leadville North
completely gets overlooked.
[3:03:38] So, is that the Mountain Valley Estates
that you're looking at or the Mountain
[3:03:42] View Village
>> that gets bypassed?
[3:03:46] » No, everything's called Mountain View.
I'm talking about Mount Mountain
[3:03:49] Mountain View Road, which is uh what are
we? County Road
[3:03:54] » um
17.
[3:03:58] Yes,
>> the the there is a path that stops at
[3:04:01] Eagle's Nest,
>> but beyond that, you've got a whole
[3:04:05] section of West Park um which almost
ties into the new developments over
[3:04:09] there. You've got Turquoise Street,
you've got um Load Stone or Homestake,
[3:04:15] you've got uh Gem Valley Estates, you've
got Silver Hills, you've got Four
[3:04:20] Seasons.
>> Yeah. Okay. Oh, no. Go ahead. Continue.
[3:04:23] I finally found a separate map to look
at that. So, yes,
[3:04:27] » there there's a just a large amount of
houses out here. There's a lot of young
[3:04:31] families. There's a lot of kids, and
they've got no way to get into town
[3:04:34] except go through the woods, go through
the cemetery, or go up Mountain View,
[3:04:39] which has no shoulder until you get just
about into town.
[3:04:44] » Okay. So, on that note, just just as an
FYI, that's is that all Leadville proper
[3:04:49] or is that in the county as well?
>> County.
[3:04:53] » County.
Okay.
[3:04:56] So again, in my coming off 99 from what
I'm seeing,
[3:05:01] it would just and again I don't know if
it would tie into that Mountain View
[3:05:05] Drive and then a bike path beyond that
Mountain View Drive
[3:05:09] through the county. I don't know. I And
again, that then would tie in with that
[3:05:13] Leadville North community and then bring
it into Leadville itself.
[3:05:20] » Does that make sense what I'm saying?
>> Yeah. I just with the last discussion it
[3:05:26] it sounded like, you know, oh, if we
don't do a bike path up 24 or a
[3:05:31] pedestrian path, bring it in 99 and go
up uh go up County Road 4, you know, and
[3:05:36] it's just County Road 4's already got a
gravel path going just about all the way
[3:05:41] down it. It's already got something
people can use. Mountain View there. The
[3:05:46] the Yeah. That that reddish one. Uh it
has nothing
[3:05:51] » until you get to West Park like further
up like almost most the way to Safeway.
[3:05:57] » Yeah. So, and what I was thinking when
you come off 99, if I were riding a bike
[3:06:01] from the trailer from those uh Mountain
View Mountain View Village, I'd take 99
[3:06:08] to get off the highway, come around and
then either jump on nine or 17 depending
[3:06:15] on how big a hurry or how the scenic and
come around that way and around. I mean,
[3:06:20] it's not You could look at that. I'm
just I'm just suggesting and and on and
[3:06:24] on. We could look at that. that would
then take it off of that put it on the
[3:06:28] county which may have a better or
different rightway take it through
[3:06:33] communities and on and on and then it
would it would benefit through that
[3:06:37] whole group and then you'd come out
mount drive around either Mount Massive
[3:06:42] or Mount Elbert Drive right around town
and that First Baptist Church of
[3:06:47] Leadville
[3:06:50] » thanks Mark that's good input that's
>> to I mean, it's much more scenic. It's
[3:06:57] It's And it may It's It's off the
highway. Again, I'm not This is
[3:07:03] Leadville and Lake County's plan, and
I'm not sure where the town limits stop
[3:07:08] and start, but again, I think that would
be something to look at down the road.
[3:07:14] And then you control the speed limits.
You control all the all that all that
[3:07:19] traffic through there.
>> Yeah, it's safer. seems much safer, too.
[3:07:27] » Again, this is the spirit of this today
is to get feedback. So, we've been
[3:07:30] working closely with Bill and we can
take this information back and come up
[3:07:35] with some ideas and and bring those
back.
[3:07:38] » So, just to be clear, is there another I
didn't catch that there's another study
[3:07:43] about a bike path to connect for all the
way? So there is um there was a grant
[3:07:51] that was obtained by recreation and that
was looking at connection between the
[3:07:57] mineral belt trail um to county road 4
to have a safer route. And so like you
[3:08:05] probably recall, we have entitlements
built into our trails that are built
[3:08:09] into Mountain Gate subdivision, Timber
Ranch, Westwoods that would help to
[3:08:15] create that connectivity to nine and
then looking at taking at 9 to the
[3:08:19] junction.
>> So I think that the effort may have be
[3:08:24] might be on hold a little bit. Mhm.
>> The biggest barrier with that was that,
[3:08:30] excuse me, the grant amount is not
actually enough to cover the whole
[3:08:35] feasibility study. And so that's kind of
where we're stuck. But thankfully, we
[3:08:40] have some more time to figure out what
we want to do with that.
[3:08:46] » Uh Pete, did you want to say something
quick? Yeah, I just wanted to point out
[3:08:49] um in regards to the bike path along
County Road 99 that um when when that
[3:08:55] subdivision was built, there was an
extra wide county rideway designated. I
[3:09:01] don't remember how wide it is
specifically for a future bike path. And
[3:09:05] that actually shows on on the plat for
the for the condos. So So there's
[3:09:11] adequate adequate rightway to put a bike
path down County Road 99. And I think
[3:09:17] early on I I gave um Bill Do a you know
a copy of the plat map. I can't remember
[3:09:24] anymore.
>> Okay, we'll follow up on that note. Uh
[3:09:28] » Grand West is a PUD and so there was um
uh the Grand West condos are a PUD and
[3:09:35] then Grand West is a subdivision and so
yeah standard practice for um
[3:09:41] subdivision review is to create um
connectivity and access through trails.
[3:09:49] » Well that that's good information.
Thanks for interjecting Mark. Is there
[3:09:53] anything else in this uh in this
presentation before we move on that
[3:09:58] you'd like to address and like input on?
>> No, just the just those bypass and again
[3:10:03] that's very if the city and the county
want to continue that conversation. It
[3:10:08] was just the bypass and then the trail
along 24. Okay.
[3:10:16] Otherwise, if they'll put in those
comments and any other comments you have
[3:10:20] and wrap it up in a bow, then I think
DJNA can can get their what they were
[3:10:24] contracted to do completed.
>> Okay. One one thing that I don't see uh
[3:10:30] Bill and Mike is is a bike path or any
connectivity on 91
[3:10:36] from, you know, some bike path or trail.
There's a lot of people that walk the
[3:10:40] highway there. 91 from the trailer park
up to Safeway. Was that part of your
[3:10:45] scope or No,
[3:10:49] » that extended a little bit further north
than the limits of our scope. Our scope
[3:10:54] went to the 91 US 24 intersection. So we
do within the plan talk about though the
[3:11:01] need for uh with the roundabout uh each
plan for the future here a way for there
[3:11:09] to be a crossing on the west leg of the
intersection recognizing that yeah
[3:11:12] people do from the park here and from
other developments here do need this
[3:11:18] connection along along the highway
there.
[3:11:21] But that was kind of the the extent of
our our scope there was that
[3:11:24] intersection.
[3:11:28] » Okay.
>> May I ask a clarifying question then of
[3:11:32] Mark? Um Mark um I I think then just so
that we have clarity as staff in helping
[3:11:38] to administer the grant and uh uh
further planning once we've taken in the
[3:11:45] feedback to DJNA and they can complete
the plan. Um maybe we have misunderstood
[3:11:51] a little bit but we thought it was
within the scope even if you know we
[3:11:55] have to do a second RFP within the the
um grant funding that we have available
[3:12:03] to then go into further design work. Um
is that did we misunderstand um that
[3:12:11] communication with you or is that still
a possibility for these funds? Now, now
[3:12:16] we're getting into the difference
between there's the IG, which is the
[3:12:20] governmental agreement, which actually
cements the funding versus the scope of
[3:12:26] work with DJNA and with grant
applications. So, if we're done with
[3:12:31] with this part, then we can now move on
to kind of the next step. And let me
[3:12:36] give just a really broad explanation
here. um the grant application asks for
[3:12:42] a certain thing from the inner mountain
TPR which was agreed to blah blah blah
[3:12:48] gave you 700,000 you had to add a match
in there 900,000
[3:12:53] um you then
we then did a scope of work then that
[3:12:58] was attached to the IG and in this scope
of work we talked about what could
[3:13:03] potentially be done sorry I'm talking
with my hands and it's showing up on the
[3:13:06] screen but that's okay um it's
interesting seeing myself and then in my
[3:13:10] screen and in your screen. So um the IG
itself then says okay you are you are in
[3:13:19] covering so much funds to do this and
then you have a scope of work with DJNA
[3:13:26] all these bits and pieces that you have
contracted that Lake County has
[3:13:30] contracted with DJNA.
So now now we get into technicalities
[3:13:36] which I will give you a a very firm
technicality
[3:13:41] in that you can only do so much before
then you risk going beyond what's
[3:13:49] allowed and then that would be a
statutory violation and I will have to
[3:13:53] say no you can't do that. Now
we're getting to some minor gray areas.
[3:14:01] Now, so is it possible to ask DJNA, and
this is just an example, you talked
[3:14:08] about north of 91, go down to where that
trailer park is. I'm guessing Mountain
[3:14:14] View Estates is what I'm seeing it as on
my map.
[3:14:18] To me, that's a small thing that you
could It's called a change order. That's
[3:14:24] But I'm not approving it. I'm from from
what here on out what I'm saying is
[3:14:30] discussions would have to happen and we
would have to get approvals and and
[3:14:34] documentation on this. So from here on
out this is just ifs and whatifs.
[3:14:41] So please understand that. So if you
said hey it's not too much a big deal
[3:14:47] and there's agreement amongst the my IG
folks. Yeah, it's not too much a big
[3:14:54] deal to to change that and have DJ and
look at Mountain View Estates coming up
[3:14:59] from 91. It's a little piece. They could
kind of look at that, draw it in or
[3:15:03] whatever. That's that's something I
would have to get approved and I could
[3:15:10] try and get see if that would be what it
would be to get that done. I don't know.
[3:15:17] But again, you have come to a point with
DJNA that they have hit their scope. And
[3:15:24] here's here's the bottom line. In all
fairness, when you go out with an RFP
[3:15:28] and people do an advertisement or or
when people bid the the project,
[3:15:34] that has to be fair. And I will not
budge on that fairness. So, if another
[3:15:39] company said, "Well, we could have done
that cheaper." And you're just thrown in
[3:15:42] a bunch of work on somebody who's
already got the the bid. That's not fair
[3:15:47] and I I cannot allow that and I will not
allow that. So we must maintain fairness
[3:15:52] across the board. The other issue has
really come that these funds have lagged
[3:15:58] for quite some time and have not been
spent really well which be that be what
[3:16:03] may we're moving through that process
the best we can. So
[3:16:10] what you would have to do regardless now
to do any design to to really decide
[3:16:16] okay you have this $500 and some
thousand
[3:16:20] what do we do with it and how can it be
most efficiently used? So, here's some
[3:16:25] ideas. What you could say maybe, and I'm
putting this as a hard maybe,
[3:16:32] is you could request to me, hey, we may
want to do a change order to allow DJNA
[3:16:37] to look at 91 just to make sure we we're
treating everybody fair and look at what
[3:16:43] it would be, how many miles, what, you
know, but do we really want again a path
[3:16:48] along 91 or do we actually want to maybe
come out Crystal? you know, that could
[3:16:54] take an actually bigger lift of a study
than what we're expecting because if you
[3:16:59] really look at it, there is no
alternative on my map that would allow
[3:17:05] you to get off of 91. So, I I just don't
know. And so, that may be something that
[3:17:12] you want to put down on a okay, maybe
for the next study or maybe for the next
[3:17:17] effort.
But either way, DJNA may have come to
[3:17:21] their into their SC scope into their
contract. And so we'll close that out
[3:17:27] and
I'll have to get clarity on this, but
[3:17:32] we'll have to either go back to the TPR
and they'll say, "Yeah, you can go ahead
[3:17:36] and finish spending," which I think they
would expect, or you may not have to go
[3:17:40] back to the TPR and they and because
we'll have to look at what you actually
[3:17:44] applied for when you're applying for
that grant. And if they if there's
[3:17:48] wiggle room in what you applied for and
applying for that grant that you could
[3:17:52] actually go on and focus on one or two
of whatever the things that came that
[3:17:58] DJNA came up with, then we will have to
go back out with another RFP to then
[3:18:07] open up a scope of work for somebody.
But I would want to sit down with Lake
[3:18:12] County and really get an idea on or or
come to some firm concepts on the limits
[3:18:22] of that RFP and what you'd want to do
because your options now from DJNA and
[3:18:27] and this is really what we wanted to do.
We wanted to have a broad view from the
[3:18:31] study and then say, okay, what is
critical? What is important? What is
[3:18:36] some lowhanging fruit that we can do?
Because there's with 500,000 there's
[3:18:41] very little you could actually do for
construction on this.
[3:18:44] » Yes.
>> So what could you actually get designed
[3:18:48] that would make sense that could
possibly be built in five years? Because
[3:18:54] anything on that sits on the shelf in
design longer than five years you either
[3:19:00] lose an opportunity
um you you have to pull it back off the
[3:19:05] shelf. and talking to engineers. A shelf
life for engineering plans are 3 to
[3:19:11] seven years max.
So, I mean, they're still good, but you
[3:19:16] you'd still have to go back and work it
out. So, if you're going to spend
[3:19:20] 500,000 on design and get it all the way
through to really good design or even
[3:19:24] 30%, or you could take two things and
say say, "Okay, we're going to see what
[3:19:28] rightway is there. We're going to see
really what utilities there and what,
[3:19:32] you know, what potential could be." And
so,
[3:19:35] That could be part of the discussion,
but anything else, you can't really ask
[3:19:40] DJ and A to do anything else
after what they've done now. And you
[3:19:47] can't add, you can add maybe a tiny bit,
but you can't add a lot. And I'd have to
[3:19:53] find truly what the difference is
between a tiny bit and a lot because at
[3:19:58] some point some other company could say,
"Hey, you're you're going beyond that."
[3:20:03] and then they get Lake County and Mark
Rogers in trouble. And I I don't want to
[3:20:08] be in trouble.
>> So,
[3:20:11] honestly, you know, let's wrap up DJNA's
contract with making sure you have good
[3:20:18] documentation, making sure you have as
much out of what their scope of work as
[3:20:23] you can get. And then we will say, okay,
and and we can do this right now. if of
[3:20:32] those four priorities that they looked
at and again I I I did a screenshot of
[3:20:36] their four four priorities
um
[3:20:41] they they had they had the identifi I
pulled the wrong screenshot sorry their
[3:20:45] four areas
um was
[3:20:50] 24 coming around there CMC
the intersection right there around
[3:20:55] Safeway and then the bypass so you could
pick one or two of those maybe and say,
[3:21:01] "Okay, really what is the priority here?
What is if we had 500,000
[3:21:07] plus to spend?" Well, four 500,000 with
the grant and then 25%
[3:21:12] you'd have to add to it for your local
match. What is it that you are
[3:21:18] priorities? What would you really think
are the priorities to do? and then maybe
[3:21:23] look at design, look at further
investigation
[3:21:27] and then you guys can go into executive
session after, maybe not today or even
[3:21:32] two weeks from now, whatever.
And then you can say, "Okay, once we're
[3:21:37] done with DJNA, and once all those bills
are sent in, we'll know exactly how much
[3:21:43] is left, then we'll try and hit priority
Y or Z, whatever." So, I've talked a lot
[3:21:48] now and I'm going to go ahead and mute
my mic and then you guys can go ahead.
[3:21:53] But is there any questions on that
specific explanation of the difference
[3:21:57] between these various grants and awards
and and rules?
[3:22:03] » Hey Mark, I I appreciate you explaining.
I think it would probably be good
[3:22:06] context for you that none of the
commissioners that are here nor myself
[3:22:10] were here when this grant was taken on
and we recognize the importance of
[3:22:14] having a fully baked plan with a
multi-year budget so that it gets picked
[3:22:17] up and are doing that with staff now. Um
I think really that's why we're in here
[3:22:23] today is to figure out what did these
guys want to do with the project that
[3:22:26] they've inherited that may or may not
have had a full scope or plan.
[3:22:31] » Yes. And the timing on this is very good
because the timing is we can wrap up
[3:22:36] with DJNA as much as we need to get that
totally completed. If they really do
[3:22:41] want to say, "Hey, can we do a change
order to bring in 91?" That's a
[3:22:47] conversation I can have with people who
have
[3:22:52] authority to make that decision and then
we can go that direction. Otherwise,
[3:22:57] we'll close out with DJNA and move on.
But I'll go ahead and mute.
[3:23:02] » Mark, one real quick question. Is there
a world I I was kind of hearing you
[3:23:06] dance around this a little. Is there a
world in which we would not be able to
[3:23:09] continue to spend the remainder of the
grant funds?
[3:23:13] » It's a very small small world. And let
me tell you the problem with this.
[3:23:17] There's two little caveats in this one.
because it's gone taken so long and the
[3:23:24] the legislature the Colorado legislature
has actually been pulling
[3:23:29] MMO funds we've the seed dots still
worked hard to make them available your
[3:23:35] guyses are locked in so they couldn't
really take those but they are watching
[3:23:40] how fast they are spent and they're
watching the draw down and these have
[3:23:45] kind of languished for this and whatever
you do we'll need to say we will get
[3:23:51] these spent. Now I don't think and again
I don't think but there is a minor
[3:23:57] possibility
that you'd have to let the inner
[3:24:01] mountain TPR know, you know, because
these funds are still out there. But you
[3:24:05] just say, "Hey, it took a while. The
commissioners changed over." You tell
[3:24:09] them the truth. And then they'd probably
say, "Okay, go ahead and finish spending
[3:24:12] your 5,000. It's already there." Because
if it does come back, they risk losing
[3:24:16] it, too. So I don't see that really
happening. I I think it's a very very
[3:24:20] minute chance, but I cannot say it won't
happen because I've seen the legislature
[3:24:25] continue to pull these MMO funds. These
local agency funds need spent at an
[3:24:31] efficient rate.
>> Okay.
[3:24:36] » Okay. Thank you, Mark. And then uh just
one question. Uh this is Matt Bulock,
[3:24:40] county commissioner. Is it fair to
future RFP recipients for us to discuss
[3:24:47] this further or do we need to
because this grant is from C do DOT so I
[3:24:53] understand that we can't really even
talk about county road for alternates
[3:24:57] for our bike path. Shall we continue
with this next phase?
[3:25:02] » Um I I don't see anything because really
what we're finishing is we're finishing
[3:25:08] discussing maybe some priorities maybe
other things. It's free to anybody who
[3:25:12] who wants to look because they can look
at this public documentation or whether
[3:25:16] they can look at the minutes or
whatever. And I don't think you're
[3:25:19] really releasing any proprietary
information that they wouldn't all have.
[3:25:24] What would be wrong is if you were
private about it and just gave it to
[3:25:27] DJNA and so then they'd have some sort
of leg up on the competition. I think
[3:25:33] it's better you actually discuss it in
public. That way, anybody who can look
[3:25:37] at the minutes down the road would have
the same ability to compete fairly.
[3:25:42] That's what you want. A level playing
field. That's part of my job is to make
[3:25:45] sure we have a level playing field.
>> Well, that's that's great. That's what
[3:25:51] we want. So, uh,
[3:25:55] just to move things forward here, I'll
just kick it off. Considering
[3:25:59] everything that we've seen here, if it
was up to me, my priority would be 24,
[3:26:06] the roundabout or the stoplight, but
maybe the roundabout because we have
[3:26:10] other plans down there
uh with a sledding hill and the mineral
[3:26:15] belt trail. So, of of all the options, I
would like to see personally that plan
[3:26:21] move forward and the other ones put on a
back burner.
[3:26:26] So, if we could use the other 500,000,
you know, maybe that would cover it.
[3:26:31] Maybe not.
>> Uh, I'm glad we're talking about this
[3:26:36] because I feel like what has come up in
the community more and more, what has
[3:26:40] come up in the community for the longest
time is the connectivity of Mountain
[3:26:44] View East and West and the that
dangerous highway that goes right
[3:26:49] through it. So maybe not connecting
the Mountain View Park to town, but
[3:26:59] safeguarding that intersection better
for the pedestrians that are crossing to
[3:27:03] bus stops
>> and for kids who are connecting across
[3:27:08] their neighborhood.
I I I knew not to talk about it in the
[3:27:13] last meeting we were gonna have, but
this has been one of my biggest
[3:27:16] curiosities is where is the work with C
dot for connecting Mountain View east
[3:27:22] and west? And
>> so now I have a question on this one. So
[3:27:25] you had traffic there. Did they not want
you to talk about it? I'm really
[3:27:29] confused here.
>> Well, no, I just knew that this was
[3:27:32] going to be on our docket.
>> Okay. Because I really I really kind of
[3:27:36] was hoping the traffic folk were stay. I
was kind of watching them in their
[3:27:39] presentation and they gave a good
presentation. But yeah, there's there's
[3:27:42] so much about that those two parks and
on and on, I really wish traffic had
[3:27:46] stayed. But even having some studies and
on and on and looking at just taking
[3:27:50] that out to 99. But anyway,
[3:27:56] » no, I agree now that Elsa says it, I do
see a lot of kids on that road.
[3:28:00] » Yeah. crossing back and forth and uh but
that seems like a with the signs with
[3:28:07] the design that is there doesn't seem
that difficult to put a flashing light
[3:28:12] some signs and stuff. I mean
that doesn't seem I know everything's
[3:28:18] expensive but it seems like most of that
work
[3:28:22] is done. Well, that's why I say when
we're looking at lowhanging fruit, like
[3:28:26] a roundabout is gonna way go over
$500,000,
[3:28:31] » whereas some signage and maybe some
striping or
[3:28:34] » or um sidewalk work. Yeah. Like that
would be able to be lowhanging fruit
[3:28:40] with this.
>> So, any construction any construction
[3:28:45] may blow this budget. What you what I
would suggest is really focus on design
[3:28:50] of something because I think any unless
you're talking just five 800 feet of
[3:28:56] sidewalk or whatever. I mean it's it's
entirely because the design you'd still
[3:29:00] have to go in and design the sidewalk
check right away and right away again
[3:29:04] maybe tight through there. Um I would
really look at DJNA's contract. Would
[3:29:12] did were they supposed to look it right
away? Were they supposed to? I mean,
[3:29:17] this is another thing, Bill. Do you know
if if that scope of work that you were
[3:29:22] contracted had you look at right away?
[3:29:29] » Oh, yeah. You know, just seeing what
the, you know, C do rightway width is.
[3:29:35] And so con concept level.
>> Okay. All right.
[3:29:42] Mark, a clarifying question that we had
in some of the factf finding on this is
[3:29:46] um potentially a 30% design would get us
to the point where we could put this in
[3:29:51] front of the IMPR for consideration for
longerterm project. Is that correct?
[3:29:56] Would we need to advance a single
project further than that 30% threshold?
[3:30:01] No, you could do one project to the 30%
threshold, but the problem is you didn't
[3:30:06] contract with DJNA to take anything to
30% threshold. What you did with them is
[3:30:12] do a really broad, which I think is
great. You did a really broad look at
[3:30:18] what their priorities are. Now, your job
gets a little more difficult. You've got
[3:30:22] to actually go in and pick a priority or
two priorities and say, "Okay, we want
[3:30:26] to advance X or Y or X and Y to 30%
level plans." And then you'll have to go
[3:30:34] out for an RFP and we'll try to really
rush that you not rush it through, but
[3:30:39] we'll try to make sure it's efficient in
a timely effic it's efficiently done in
[3:30:43] a timely manner.
>> Sorry for the double speak. Just
[3:30:48] » that's that's really helpful. Well, I
think for our purposes for this meeting,
[3:30:51] if we can walk out of this room with
guidance for CPD in terms of the
[3:30:55] direction from the BOCC, which of these
we would like to pursue, all of that
[3:31:00] kind of RFP development, that all comes
after, but I think we need the guidance
[3:31:04] on the next steps from the decision
makers in this room as to which of these
[3:31:08] do you want the energy to go into to get
to that 30 or 60 or whatever threshold
[3:31:12] of design.
Can I can I add to that because the
[3:31:16] numbers that we gave you in that email
are like $260,000
[3:31:21] to move all of them forward
>> to to 30%.
[3:31:24] » Mhm.
>> I know you read that you have that
[3:31:26] opportunity, but I just want to be
clear. Um so one idea is to keep them
[3:31:31] all alive. That would be one way to do
it. Um versus moving one forward.
[3:31:37] » I like that. Yeah, that's that's so
200,000 was and these these are just
[3:31:43] ballpark amounts. Of course, we would
have to go out to RFP to and you know
[3:31:48] close out the plan then go out to RFP.
So, our intent was to to do as as um uh
[3:31:57] Mark has indicated, close out the plan,
but get feedback today on what you're
[3:32:01] hearing and what your thoughts are on
that and then look how we could
[3:32:07] further leverage these funds to be more
competitive. So, it sounds to me like
[3:32:11] with the funds left, we could do we
could look at advancing all three of
[3:32:16] these projects and then push the
decision to a later date once we once
[3:32:23] we've established our priorities. I
mean, that sounds reasonable to me.
[3:32:27] » It's like the four. It's actually all
four.
[3:32:29] » Okay.
>> 200,000 was just and these are
[3:32:32] ballparks. We'd have to sus this out
better. Um and we will have to work
[3:32:36] directly with Mark to make sure that you
know finalizing the plan then going out
[3:32:41] through RFP to look at taking these
priorities to um a 30% design you know
[3:32:48] but working very closely with them to
make sure that we're within our
[3:32:52] statutory obligation the grant is
obviously what we would be doing too. M
[3:32:56] » but um if if that would be possible for
us to have enough funding to look at
[3:33:02] those. So maybe we have an idea of what
maybe your number your your two highest
[3:33:07] priorities are. But if we have the
possibility to look at at all of these
[3:33:11] that have been identified that would
probably be your first choice. It'd be
[3:33:14] great to have maybe a second choice.
>> I I love that. Is this is our match
[3:33:21] already budgeted for that work? it. I
think it should be.
[3:33:26] » Yes. I mean, this
>> is it. Is it in your budget?
[3:33:29] » It's not.
>> It's not in my The only thing that I do
[3:33:32] is just make sure that the invoices
match the work that's been done.
[3:33:36] » This was in Duncan. Was that
>> or where?
[3:33:38] » I think it wasn't Tim.
>> It was I mean Tim
[3:33:45] Feedler project. So, it never even
originated in CPD either.
[3:33:49] » Bringing it up.
>> Honestly, I'll have to look at it. as
[3:33:52] well since we account for grants a
little bit differently. If not, I mean,
[3:33:58] we can figure it out if we want to
finish expending the money, but I don't
[3:34:01] know what to talk about without looking
at the budget.
[3:34:04] » Yeah,
>> I think that would be my only
[3:34:05] consideration of just choosing one as
opposed to going out and doing the full
[3:34:10] 270 for all three. If if it's unlikely
that we could do all three and it's an
[3:34:16] extra cost to us to match the grant,
that would be my that's why I would
[3:34:20] choose one. So we can it' be great to
know finding that out.
[3:34:23] » Thank you.
>> Commissioner Lee, you still with us? you
[3:34:29] want got anything you'd like to add
before we uh
[3:34:33] » Yeah, I just uh am wondering, you know,
it sounds like Commissioner Bullock, you
[3:34:42] you're kind of keen on the roundabout
situation and and taking the planning of
[3:34:46] that forward as well as the um Mountain
View Village East and West. Elsa, you're
[3:34:52] really championing for Mountain View
East and West. And then um I I am
[3:34:59] partial to the uh pedestrian path that
gets people from Mountain View east and
[3:35:04] west into town.
>> What was the fourth one? Was that the
[3:35:09] excuse me, sorry, the the north gateway,
>> sidewalk enhancements,
[3:35:16] » safely. Yeah. Yeah, bus stop
bus stop and and just that traffic
[3:35:23] combing and some ways to have better
mobility in that area.
[3:35:26] » And then and then for our next steps,
we're looking at right now
[3:35:32] uh wrapping this up, putting an RFP out
to take how many of these next projects
[3:35:39] to 30% completion?
All all four or three or two?
[3:35:47] » All four. Yeah, we'd like to look at all
four, but having like a second plan if
[3:35:51] that doesn't work after we talk to Mark
and have a better idea of where we're
[3:35:55] at. So, we had
>> Okay.
[3:35:58] Commissioners have identified maybe two
priorities.
[3:36:02] » Did you hear that, Andy?
>> Yeah, I did. What that kind of aligns
[3:36:07] with what my concerns were with that
trying to use what's left in this in
[3:36:13] this pot to take all four projects to a
30%
[3:36:18] planning completion felt like a stretch
to me.
[3:36:26] I also I worry
that
[3:36:31] like number one, we don't have to spend
all these funds and we don't have to
[3:36:35] match all of these funds. So, anything
that we're not matching is money we're
[3:36:41] saving. So, if there are any of these
that we don't need to do, like that's
[3:36:45] money that we won't spend.
I just want us to have that little flag.
[3:36:50] And then the MMO funding that comes
through the IMTPR,
[3:36:56] like has been said already in this room,
is at risk. It's at greater and greater
[3:37:00] risk every single year with like the
things that are going on the ballot, the
[3:37:04] way that the legislature is trying to
mitigate those impacts. Like MOF is
[3:37:10] going to
we don't know how much it's going to be
[3:37:14] around. So, I think I personally would
rather have like a streamlined let's get
[3:37:18] this one thing that done that we can get
done now knowing that we won't be able
[3:37:23] to get all four done or probably even
two. Um, it's just a consideration I
[3:37:29] wanted to bring up in case it impacts
how we would make a decision.
[3:37:35] » Well, I just to remind you this grant is
just planning and design.
[3:37:41] » I know. So, we can't actually like use
this funding to implement anything.
[3:37:46] » I know. I'm saying that
>> getting it done.
[3:37:48] » To get it done is less and less likely
in the future. So, if we know we're not
[3:37:53] going to be able to get it done, why
spend even the extra matching dollars
[3:37:57] » to do the planning,
>> right? A plan that's not going to
[3:38:01] » we Yeah. If we know it's not
>> Mark, did you want to chime in there?
[3:38:05] » Sure.
>> In your hand.
[3:38:07] » Sorry. I do. I do. I try not to
interrupt. It's just hard to find the
[3:38:11] hand here. Here, I'll give you some
reasons why you want to continue. One,
[3:38:15] yeah, your funding may be kind of iffy
right now in the future, but future can
[3:38:21] get really future could be here really
fast with new funding. You just never
[3:38:27] know with local agency funding. Um, it
just depends in four years, five years,
[3:38:33] you could have that. So, you want to
continue down the road you're looking at
[3:38:38] because if it's not there, you're going
to eventually have to get 30% plans at
[3:38:43] some time. Now, to better understand 30%
plans, what you're wanting, and Bill,
[3:38:49] you may want to help me out a little bit
here,
[3:38:52] you're basically going to be getting a
good rightway set of plans of what's
[3:38:58] there and what's not, what the potential
has. Because at 30% plans, what you're
[3:39:03] really looking for is it's better than
back a napkin, but it's not you can't
[3:39:08] really start construction on it yet. You
want your rideway done. You want to make
[3:39:13] sure if there's any utilities are in the
way. So, you'll kind of do a a overview
[3:39:18] of what utilities are there. Rightway is
crucial because right away can kill a
[3:39:24] project before anything else does
because it gets so expensive that you
[3:39:28] can't do anything. So you want to look
at rightway, you want to look at
[3:39:34] feasibility type stuff. So if you've got
really steep terrain
[3:39:39] and you don't want that and you're going
to have to do some curves kind of you
[3:39:43] you're going to basically it's called
field inspection review is 30% plans.
[3:39:48] You're going to get estimates that are
not just kind of guesses. You're going
[3:39:53] to get good estimates on those projects.
You're going to have the rightway plans
[3:39:59] or not plans, but you're going to have
at least known sections and and those
[3:40:04] are good for, you know, if you if
they're not going to get sold off, it's
[3:40:08] like state property or whatever. If it's
private property, you know, you want to
[3:40:11] avoid it. So, with the FIR, the field
inspection review plans, you're going to
[3:40:17] have a pretty solid concept of the
elevation, you know, where it's going to
[3:40:22] go, if if it's even feasible. you're
going to have the rightway and and
[3:40:27] potential utilities and also envir
environmental look at that and typically
[3:40:32] the environmental is covered within
region 3. We go out there and just do a
[3:40:36] brief review. So that's cover all our
local agency projects are covered by we
[3:40:41] don't charge when we do our
environmental review. So really, you'd
[3:40:44] just be paying for
really good concept designs that can
[3:40:52] kind of show elevation, show
feasibility, and the rightway. Those
[3:40:56] that's really what you want more than
anything out of your 30% plans. And
[3:41:04] the the bypass would be a little bit
harder to do because it's so some of
[3:41:09] those areas are so big and you're going
to be crossing so much through there.
[3:41:13] But definitely on the other three you
can get pretty good could could get
[3:41:18] pretty good through FIR level plans. So
then you have that because these funds
[3:41:27] right now they may not be coming around
right away but you have them now. I
[3:41:33] would use them and then just cross your
fingers and hope that more local agency
[3:41:40] funds become available down the road.
>> Okay. Well, thank you, Mark. Uh,
[3:41:48] yeah, I think I'd be willing to uh
eliminate the bypass and then I guess
[3:41:54] the question is could we get all the
remaining three
[3:41:59] to 30% with the funds we have left?
That's that'd be ideal. And that's what
[3:42:03] you're saying, Mark. So that'd be the
next step. And then we prioritize those
[3:42:09] three. If we can't get those three done
with the funds we have left, then we
[3:42:14] start we eliminate one at a time.
>> And it sounds like from staff that we
[3:42:18] can get that done,
>> that we could get all three to 30%.
[3:42:22] » 270
>> is what it would cost to get all of them
[3:42:25] » and the bypass.
>> And the bypass. And I just want to
[3:42:28] triple check that that so just for
context
[3:42:32] grant matches should be carried forward
>> should be
[3:42:37] » um if they were recorded in restricted
account codes uh I was not here neither
[3:42:42] was Will at that time so I just want to
make sure that's actually what happened
[3:42:45] with the match.
So that's what we need to know first.
[3:42:49] Yeah.
>> Does this cost us extra money or have we
[3:42:52] allocated the funds?
>> And then number two, we will create an
[3:42:57] RFP
for the 30%.
[3:43:00] » Design
>> for all four.
[3:43:02] » For all four if that's the case. If it's
not the case that we have the funds,
[3:43:06] then we'll come back and have a
conversation about how much we want to
[3:43:08] spend. Yeah. And then prioritize from
there.
[3:43:12] » Okay.
>> Great.
[3:43:14] » Talk about a roundabout. Holy moly.
It's felt harder than it needed to be.
[3:43:26] » Can I add one other thing
>> also? I would really love to have a
[3:43:31] schedule. Sorry if I keep I would love
to have a schedule to make sure that we
[3:43:35] keep on a path here. So, a schedule as
far as when DJNA,
[3:43:41] all that information is done and closed
out and then we could because we could
[3:43:46] be talking about the RF, the future RFP
while we're while they're still going on
[3:43:51] there and then once we have that closed
out, we know exactly how much is done.
[3:43:56] » We hear you loud and clear, Mark. We
really appreciate that input.
[3:44:01] » Yeah, thank you for that, Mark. One of
one of the things we clarified is the
[3:44:05] IGA we have with them is good through
July of of 2033.
[3:44:10] » Okay.
>> So even though maybe we could be going
[3:44:13] faster, we've got some time.
>> Yeah.
[3:44:15] » But what we hear you though, Mark, and
and we'll we'll start working on that
[3:44:20] directly with you and make sure or at
least check in with you and have those
[3:44:23] checkpoints. But that makes total sense.
[3:44:28] Mark, how big is the list of
deliverables you would want to see on a
[3:44:32] schedule?
[3:44:36] » A very high level. So, basically, it's
just going to be
[3:44:41] we're going to go out to add with an RFP
X, you know, by certain month and year.
[3:44:47] We're going to close it out with DJNA by
a certain next and month and year. And
[3:44:51] then because you I really don't want you
going out for another RFP till DJNA is
[3:44:56] done. And I mean, we can discuss it. We
can get it all drafted, but we don't
[3:45:00] want to go out until we have that taken
care of. That way, we know exactly how
[3:45:06] much money is out there. That's the key.
And then as soon as we get a new person
[3:45:12] on or a new or or we get DJ, whatever,
when we get the that one filled, then
[3:45:20] they need to have a scope that they go
right in and they know exactly what they
[3:45:24] have to do. They have to get the
rightway. They got to get the utilities.
[3:45:27] They have to get all this done and
present it to you.
[3:45:31] » Okay,
>> great. Thank you.
[3:45:34] » I think we got path forward. Thanks for
your input, Mark.
[3:45:38] » Thank you.
>> If you guys are done with me, done
[3:45:41] questions. I'll go ahead and let you go
ahead. Any other questions?
[3:45:46] » Okay.
>> None for me. Thank you, Mark.
[3:45:49] » And again, I have my phone number. If
there's something you guys need, be
[3:45:53] please give me a call.
Thank you so much.
[3:45:56] » Thanks, Mark.
>> You got it.
[3:46:04] » Okay, next steps.
[3:46:08] Pete,
>> can I make a general comment?
[3:46:11] » Sure.
>> I think you need to um um the DJNA
[3:46:18] proposal had, you know, a lot more
public interaction, you know, than you
[3:46:22] guys just deciding right away. I think
that certainly would be appropriate to
[3:46:27] have a town hall and and you know
address the the um the projects and see
[3:46:33] what what the people are interested in.
Um I think that was contemplated. I'd
[3:46:38] hate to see that you know that taken out
of the out of the process. Um and um
[3:46:46] let's see.
Um
[3:46:51] yeah, I I just think that there needs to
be more public process in this and I
[3:46:54] think that was promised. The other thing
is that you know there's no data draft
[3:46:58] report out there that should be made
available to the public as well to you
[3:47:02] know to inform the public as to what
DJNA has done, what conclusions they've
[3:47:08] reached, how they've reached them. Um
I've been asking for the draft report
[3:47:12] for about six months now and it's always
been, you know, in county review. So,
[3:47:16] there's got to be some paper out there
that's available for review and the
[3:47:20] public ought to have a chance to to
review it and comment.
[3:47:25] » Thanks.
>> Thank you, Pete.
[3:47:28] » Yeah, I can appreciate that sentiment as
we go back and and look at this and talk
[3:47:32] with Mark.
um because this grant has been lingering
[3:47:37] out there for a while. It will really
depend on like how much time we have to
[3:47:42] do something with it, especially because
there was not a fully developed plan
[3:47:47] that we I think all have in front of us
to follow. So I think whether we can do
[3:47:52] that or not will partially depend on the
timing of the funding that's left
[3:47:58] available and and what was written into
the grant when it was applied for. But
[3:48:03] we can definitely update you once we
have some conversations with him about
[3:48:07] how much time we have left to explain
the
[3:48:10] » and if the the match truly good.
>> I was just talking about,
[3:48:16] » you know, Mark was making a big deal
about closing out the DGNA part.
[3:48:20] » You know, what what deliverables, you
know, they had in their in their
[3:48:24] proposal that were in the RFP that still
need to be to be done. And I think the
[3:48:28] public interaction piece still needs to
be done.
[3:48:32] and and the plan does um include there
was engagement um done by the
[3:48:37] consultants. Um so
I did include public engagement that
[3:48:42] that is within the report that we've
provided.
[3:48:46] » That's what I was
>> So there was some included we had to
[3:48:50] pivot just a little bit on an actual
event in the um manufactured home
[3:48:54] community. Um but other than that um I
don't know if you want to hear about
[3:48:58] that or not but there was public
engagement done as part of it.
[3:49:02] » Thank you.
>> I remember that.
[3:49:03] » Yeah.
>> Yeah. Yeah. Yeah.
[3:49:04] » It kind of over overlapped a bit with
the L community project.
[3:49:07] » Y trying to tie it together since we
knew we had people gathering anyway. Y
[3:49:12] » so it was during that time.
>> It was like the beginning of when we
[3:49:15] were seated.
>> Yeah.
[3:49:18] » Right.
>> Yeah.
[3:49:19] » Yeah.
>> Yeah. That's true.
[3:49:21] » But it was part of the scope and it was
included. Yeah. And we didn't want to we
[3:49:26] didn't want to send out the draft until
the board really had an opportunity to
[3:49:30] review it. So, you know, that that's
part of why and it's been six months
[3:49:36] easily.
>> Okay.
[3:49:39] » Well, good. Well, thanks for the hard
work on this, you guys. Let's uh take
[3:49:44] all this input and move forward.
Hate to see this money disappear before
[3:49:50] we can use it.
>> Yeah. Any
[3:49:54] questions you have for us, Bill or Mike?
[3:49:59] » Um, not right now. I think, uh, you
know, we heard Mark Mark's comments and
[3:50:04] I think, uh, have good understanding of
some items to revise as it relates to
[3:50:10] that uh, the bike path concept within
the document. Um, and then we'll circle
[3:50:15] back with Melissa and Ann for any other
um items that we need to to clean up or
[3:50:21] incorporate in uh to put together uh a
final draft of that document.
[3:50:27] » Okay. Thank you.
>> Thanks.
[3:50:29] » Thank you.
[3:50:34] » All right. Should we close it out?
Conclude our Lake County Commissioners
[3:50:40] work session. Thanks all for coming.
Thank you everybody online.
[3:50:45] » Thank you chair. Thank you Elsa. Thank
you staff.
[3:50:50] » Thank you Andy.
Get better, Andy. Hey here.