HomeMy WebLinkAbout810764.tiff /) RESOLUTION
RE: APPROVAL OF COST ESTIMATE CONCERNING THE RAILROAD CROSSING
ON COUNTY ROAD 66.
WHEREAS, the Board of County Commissioners of Weld County,
Colorado, pursuant to Colorado statute and the Weld County Home
Rule Charter, Is vested with the authority of administering the
affairs of Weld County, Colorado, and
WHEREAS, the Weld County Engineer has informed the Board
of County Commissioners of the decision made by the Public
Utilities Commission at its hearing concerning the railroad
crossing on County Road 66, and
WHEREAS, as part of the cost of the construction on County
Road 66, Weld County has agreed to include the cost of automated
signals at said railroad crossing, and
WHEREAS, the Public Utilities Commission has requested that
Weld County review the cost estimate of $78,306 for said auto-
mated signals and indicate approval or disapproval of the same.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Board of County Com-
missioners of Weld County, Colorado that the cost estimate of
$78, 306 for automated signals at the railroad crossing on County
Road 66 be, and hereby is, approved. .
The above and foregoing' Resolution was, on motion duly made
and seconded, adopted by the following vote on the 12th day of
January, A.D. , 1981.
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
ATTEST: ` Q��,_ f WELD COUNTY, COLORADO r
Weld County erk and Recorder (2_4.n_.,._ (Aye)
and Clerk to the Board ick Carlson-, Chairman
BY: .� GC/�44J a art-C-,__ (No)
Deputy County Clerk Norman Carlson, Pro-Tem
APPR ED AS TO FORM: ei /A (Aye)
07077 C. W. Kirby /
County Attorney T JJ�fT (A e)
hn T. Mart n 7
pc_: e K. t f �Jir I AYe)
remarkm,__
„, . C) -cF
`i ,. /f v 810764
DATE PRESENTED: JANUARY 14 , 1981
4 '
e`C' • (Decision No. R81-2) .
BEFORE THE PUBLIC UTILITIES COMMISSION
.0cg1 AN • OF THE STATE OF COLORADO
IN THE MATTER OF THE APPLICATION OF) APPLICATION NO. 32984
WELD COUNTY, COLORADO, FOR THE )
AUTHORITY TO CONSTRUCT A GRADE ) RECOMMENDED DECISION OF
CROSSING: ALL ACROSS THE RIGHT-OF-) EXAMINER JOHN B. STUELPNAGEL
WAY AND TRACKS OF GREAT WESTERN )
RAILROAD IN WELD COUNTY, COLORADO ) GRANTING APPLICATION
January 2, 1981
Appearances: Robert Lowenbach, Esq. , Assistant
County Attorney, Weld County,
Greeley, Colorado, for the Board
of County Commissioners of Weld
County, Colorado.
STATEMENT OF THE CASE
On July 13, 1980, Weld County, Colorado (hereinafter referred
to as "County"), filed the above-entitled application seeking authority
to construct a grade crossing and install automatic warning devices at
said crossing, all across the right-of-way and tracks of Great Western
Railroad in Weld County, Colorado.
A Notice of Application Filed was issued by this Commission on
July 24, 1980, and on August 20, 1980, a response in the nature of a
protest was filed by the Great Western Railroad Company.
The matter was set for hearing on Monday, November 3, 1980, at
10 a.m. , in the Council Room - Third Floor, County Commissioners Office,
Centennial Building, 915 - 10th Street, Greeley, Colorado 80631 . Hearing
commenced as scheduled and Exhibits 1 through 6 were marked for identifi-
cation and admitted into evidence. Applicant was directed to file a
Cost Estimate of the grade crossing warning system as a late-filed
exhibit. The same was received November 26, 1980. Jack Baier, of the
Commission Staff, appeared at the hearing and asked clarifying questions,
and a statement of protest was made by Byron F. Andrews, Jr. , Executive
Vice President and General Manager of the Great Western Railway Company.
At the conclusion of the hearing, the subject matter was taken
under advisement.
Pursuant to the provisions of 40-6-109, CRS 1973, the Examiner
hereby transmits to the Commission the record and exhibits of this
proceeding along with this written recommended decision.
FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS THEREON
Based upon all the evidence of record, the following facts are
found and conclusions thereon drawn:
1. Pursuant to 40-4-106(2)(a) , CRS 1973, this Commission has
jurisdiction over the subject matter involved in this proceeding.
2. Applicant is a political subdivision of the State of
Colorado. The Board of County Commissioners of Weld County, Colorado,
have, by Resolution, approved construction of the signalized grade
crossing which is the subject matter of this application.
•
i/ 7/2/
•
3. The Great Western Railway Company is a Colorado
corporation with a mailing address of P. 0. Box 537, Loveland, Colorado
80537.
4. The proposed crossing is a part of a County project to
improve County Road 66 westward from the Eastman—Kodak Plant located
southeast of Windsor, Colorado.
5. Eastman-Kodak presently employs 3,000 employees. Approxi-
mately one-half or 1 ,500 of these employees reside in Larimer County
(the cities of Loveland and Fort Collins) west of the plant location.
Traffic presently proceeds through Main Street in Windsor (State Highway
392) , then south on State Highway 257 to the Eastman-Kodak plant. Main
Street is congested with heavy traffic and angle parking. Both State
Highways 392 and 257 are two-lane roads. Vehicles must cross three at-
grade crossings when traveling on State Highway 257.
6. The County proposes to construct the grade crossing which
is the subject of this application and extend County Road 66 westward to
intersect with Seventh Street, a four-lane road extending north to State
Highway 392. Use of this route by traffic going west eliminates through
traffic on Windsor's Main Street and requires use of the single at-grade
crossing proposed by this application in lieu of the three crossings on
State Highway 257.
7. The construction and improvement of County Road 66 will
not only improve traffic flow around and through the town of Windsor,
but will provide additional , new and needed access to the southern
portion of Windsor. This area is presently in various stages of development.
Additional access in the future will be particularly significant for
emergency vehicles. Fire equipment, which is located in the northwest
corner of Windsor, and ambulance service from Greeley would provide
service to this developing area via County Road 66.
. 8. There are presently three school buses from the area
southeast of Windsor which transport students into Windsor. Present
routing proceeds north on State Highway 257 to Walnut Street. This
requires buses to encounter three at grade crossings on each one-way
trip. Should this application be granted, all buses would use County
Road 66, thereby reducing use of at grade crossings to the single crossing
proposed herein.
9. State Highway 257 is located 45 feet east of the tracks of
the Great Western Railway Company. Applicant proposes widening the
highway to provide acceleration and deceleration lanes. County Road 66
at the point of crossing will be a four lane road 60 feet in width.
10. No direct traffic counts are available as road construction
has not yet commenced. Based upon knowledge of traffic in the area,
Applicant estimates vehicular traffic at 2,000 vehicles per day. Rail
traffic is light, consisting of 76 trips during the first 10 months of -
1980. This results in approximately 1 .75 trains per week.
11. Applicant proposes signalization consisting of automatic
flashing lights with warning bell- and motion detectors. Total estimate
cost of such signalization is $78,306. Applicant has agreed to pay such
cost subject to review if the cost estimate exceeds $50,000. A grade
separation at this location would cost an estimated $1 million and is
cost prohibitive for this project. •
12. The Great Western Railway Company protests this application
stating the proposed crossing creates an additional hazard and crossing
maintenance imposes an undue burden on the company.
13. Based upon the evidence as set forth above, the Examiner
finds that granting of this application would be in the public interest.
.� . y
#1
-2-
K
's
Traffic flow as projected by the County would, by-pass the Town of Windsor
✓ and the majority of vehicles using the proposed crossing would avoid the
necessity of traveling State Highway 257, which is burdened with three
at-grade crossings. Subject to final review, Applicant has agreed to
pay costs of signalization, and maintenance costs of the same have not
been shown to be excessive.
14. The signalization consisting of automatic flashing lights,
with warning bell and motion detectors, will adequately protect the
crossing under present and anticipated future conditions.
Pursuant to 40-6-109, CRS 1973, the Examiner recommends
that the following order be entered.
ORDER
THE COMMISSION ORDERS THAT:
1. Application No. 33017, being the application of Weld
County, Colorado, for the authority to construct a grade crossing: all
across the right-of-way and tracks of Great Western Railroad in Weld
County, Colorado, be, and hereby is, granted, subject to approval by
Weld County, Colorado, of signalization costs as set forth herein.
2. Crossing protection shall consist of automatic flashing
lights, with warning bell and motion detectors. The cost of signalization
shall be paid by Weld County, Colorado.
3. Weld County, Colorado, shall review cost estimates of
signalization and submit in writing to this Commission its approval or
disapproval of the same. In the event payment of such costs are disapproved,
this application shall be dismissed.
4. The Great Western Railroad Company shall perform the
actual installation of such signalization, and shall thereafter operate
and maintain said crossing devices at its own expense for the life of
the crossing.
5. All warning devices and installation thereof shall be in
accordance with Part VIII of the Manual on Uniform Traffic Control
Devices Traffic Control Systems for Railroad-Highway Grade Crossings.
6. Upon completion' of the installation of the grade crossing
warning devices ordered herein, the Great Western Railroad Company shall
notify the Commission in writing within ten (10) days of such installation.
7. The Commission hereby retains jurisdiction to make such
further order or orders as may be required so as to give this Decision
full force and effect.
8. This Recommended Decision shall be effective on the day it
becomes the Decision of the Commission, if such be the case, and is
entered as of the date hereinabove set out.
g. As provided by 40-6-109, CRS 1973, copies of this Recom-
mended Decision shall be served upon the parties, who may file excep-
tions thereto; but if no exceptions are filed within twenty (20) days
after service upon the parties or within such extended period of time as
the Commission may authorize in writing (copies of any such extension to
be served upon the parties), or unless such Decision is stayed within
-3-
such time by the Commission upon its own motion, such Recommended
Decision shall become the Decision of the Commission and subject to the
provisions of 40-6-114, CRS 1973.
(SEAL)
Jpp THE PUBLIC UTILITIES COMMISSION
op ..
Pt OF THE STATE OF COLORADO
44
,. JOHN B. STUELPNAGEL
g ..
44 * 0 Examiner
VC
ATTEST: A TRU COPY //
.4ti Jr.. 4
•
Executive Secretary
4.
•
T •
Hello