The URL can be used to link to this page

Browse Search

Home My WebLink About20195209.tiffEXHIBIT INVENTORY CONTROL SHEET CASE 18-0130 - CITY OF THORNTON Tyler Exhibit Submitted By Paue # Description Planning A. Commission Resolution of Recommendation Planning B. Commission Summary of Hearing (Minutes dated 04/16/2019) C. Planning Services PowerPoint presentation D. Bill Wycoff Alignment Study (Received 7/8/2019) E. Bill Wycoff Thornton GMA Map Future Land Use, Quebec Alternative Alignment, Quebec Preferred Alignment 2008 Study, Preferred Alignment with TWP, Letter of Concern for Alignment Commitment, 10/15/2018 Email Forwarded to Tom Parko, 10/16/2018 Tom Parko Response Email to Wycoff, Preferred Alternative Recommendation, Recommendation Sentence, Presentation Notes, TWP Typical Easement Right of Way (Received 7/8/2019) F. Applicant PowerPoint presentation (received 7/9/2019) G. H. J. K. L. M. N. O. P. Q. 2019-5209 r O -4 w • r T _ r -+r r ••--ens • a RIM f. If. air— • • ♦ ti I • ADAMS COUNTY WELD COUNTY"' O`0 ��O �L�C >r ,b3 MI t••• + T —44 1 •• • a S e s i Y , - J I r 168TH AVE COUNTY ROAD 4 r T COUNTY ROAD 8 C O O 6 r • , F a • I is i O 0 v • J cn COUNTY ROAD 12 • MI t STATE HIGHWAY 52I. COUNTY ROAD 16 Et -41L4. COUNTY ROAD 20 f 2 j Aj-4• 4 a. m j COUNTY ROAD 24 nu C. C Z O'° i D ■ D 2 a •• 0 v L K 3 STATE HIGHWAY 66 1� Y i `, III --It i M x x - *bad x ape •m O cn m J o O z O ma Saooas m C m z n • is x • b a rJ CA C O .a T. a v ' O p t,, o i a ill g PI m a p S t cQ zzs La i t - � < A A D '' USR XX-XXXX VICINITY MAP THIORNTONWATER PROJEC7 c�TvOF fHORNTON TNORNTON CO NO DATE REVISION BY APyU DSSK DR CHK APVC Kt,,v rr t,rn netn '1R30OCt1�Nt T ISSUED FOR PERMIT NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION AND ItE I0EA6 MC 0ESIG+6 sIt.ORt•p4,..TtU ' IEREp, AS AN IlSTIljESWNAI SERVICE R Too apt" R^• Or ^Xi4 ' i ANO 6 s0T TOM V3nG k Whet OR S. DART t0R MV OTHER D qo,LCT ',WNW,' THE WRITTEN Au T,10RIZATK 13r Cmn• Hid acnn''n • ]0+S At ap.TE RITSFeVr' Vicinity Map The 5 yellow areas on the map show where the pipeline is proposed to be in the County ROW. The 3 hatched areas show where the pipeline is located in other jurisdictions. ce U CR �8 - R.26 CR.24 _ CR'22 CR.20 CR) !Ii CR CR CR i4n 1 HWY.:52 CR Dry Creek RUA CR2 This portion of the pipeline is located between CR 2 to just north of HWY 66 for a total of 13.3 miles Zoning Map County ROW — 1 County ROW - 3 County ROW - Pipeline in Platteville and Firestone 9 CR b Pipe me in Frederick L vim C CR 22 I CR 2 Or CR 14 a HWY 52 CR 6 Dry Creek RUA !CR4 r 2 C Code Chapter 23, Article ii, Division 6 The Board of County Commissioners may approve an application for construction or expansion of a PIPELINE - DOMESTIC WATER only if all applicable requirements of this Division are met, and the applicant has shown that the application is consistent with Chapter 22 of the Weld County Code and the following standards: 1. All reasonable efforts have been made to avoid irrigated cropland or to minimize the negative impacts on agricultural USES and lands. 2. The PIPELINE - DOMESTIC WATER will not have an undue adverse effect on existing and future development of the surrounding area as set forth in applicable MASTER PLANS.C. 3. The design of the proposed PIPELINE - DOMESTIC WATER mitigates negative impacts on the surrounding area to the greatest extent feasible. 4. The site shall be maintained in such a manner so as to control soil erosion, dust and the growth of NOXIOUS WEEDS. 5. The applicant has agreed to implement any reasonable measures deemed necessary by the Board of County Commissioners to ensure that the health, safety and welfare of the inhabitants of the COUNTY will be protected, and to mitigate or minimize any potential adverse impacts from the proposed PIPELINE - DOMESTIC WATER. 6. All reasonable alternatives to the proposal have been adequately assessed, and the proposed action is consistent with the best interests of the people of the COUNTY and represents a balanced use of resources in the affected area. 7. The nature and location or expansion of the PIPELINE - DOMESTIC WATER will not unreasonably interfere with any significant wildlife habitat and will not unreasonably affect any endangered wildlife species, unique natural resource, known historic landmark or archaeological site within the affected area. 8. No adverse impact from stormwater runoff to the public rights -of -way and/or surrounding properties as a result of the PIPELINE - DOMESTIC WATER. Selena Baltierra • • Esther Gesick .subject: RE: USRR18-O13O, BOCC meeting of July 10, 2019 - First, large file. From: wwycoffbn7@aol.com <wwycoffbn7@aol.com> Sent: Monday, July 8, 2019 11:40 AM To: Esther Gesick <egesick@weldgov.com> Subject: USRR18-0130, BOCC meeting of July 10, 2019 - First, large file. Caution: This email originated from outside of Weld County Government. Do not click links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe. MS. Gesick, Per my voice mail, I am sending to you documents for the Commissioners use in deciding the outcome of USR18-0130. It is the City of Thornton Water Project. I am sending the largest file alone. My next message will be the remaining items. that will be sent regarding this case. Please let me know if there is anything I need to do. Thank you. Best Regards, Bill Wycoff 303.659.7259 1 LU�1rJ/AcJc,mf County Lines CcoiicoacJi Alignment ItucJu fiff fa t Wilk COLORADO • ADAMS COUNTY COLORADO October 2008 H �1 city of Thornton PIPFELSBURG 4HOLT & ULLEVIG I if { � 1 C. COLORADO ADAMS COUNTY COLORADO City of Thornton Weld/Adams County Line Crossroads Alignment Study Weld County Public Works Department P.O. Box 758 1111 "H" Street Greeley, Colorado 80631 970-356-4000 Adams County 12200 North Pecos Street 31° Floor Westminster, CO 80234 303-453-8800 Prepared for: City of Northglenn 11701 Community Center Drive Northglenn, CO 80233 303-450-8835 Prepared by: Felsburg Holt & Ullevig 6300 South Syracuse Way Suite 600 Centennial, CO 80111 303-721-1440 Principal: Christopher J. Fasching, P.E. Project Manager: Jeffery W. Dankenbring, P.E. FHU Reference No. 08-042 October 2008 E E LS R U RCS (IHOLT ULLEVIG City of Thornton 9500 Civic Center Drive Thornton, Colorado 80229 303-538-7333 fit' let COLORADO �I►1\t' ( Ill'\ I l COLORADO seen City of Thornton Weld/Adams County Line Crossroads Alignment Study TABLE OF CONTENTS INTRODUCTION Project Background Study Purpose Study Process Public Input II. EXISTING AND FUTURE CONDITIONS Collected Data Information III. IDENTIFICATION OF ALTERNATIVES Page 1 1 1 - -- - -1 -- ------2 3 Design Parameters Construction and Right-of-way Schedule Generation of Alternatives IV. EVALUATION & RECOMMENDATION OF ALTERNATIVES Weld County Road 11/York Street & Weld County Road 2/East 168th Avenue Intersection Weld County Road 15/Holly Street & Weld County Road 2/East 168' Avenue Intersection Weld County Road 17/Quebec Street & Weld County Road 2/East 168t" Avenue Intersection Weld County Road 19/Yosemite Street& Weld County Road 2/East 168th Avenue Intersection Weld County Road 23.5/Tucson Street& Weld County Road 2/East 168th Avenue Intersection V. CONCLUSION ----- Intersection Configurations Study Implementation Process Intersection Improvement Implementation Process 3 9 9 10 10 16 17 23 29 35 40 47 47 47 47 FELSBURG HOLT & ULLEVIG October 2008 7a onto ,A6 COLOR A DO 1I)U1(tit \I1 COLOUAOO sOr City of Thornton Weld/Adams County Line Crossroads Alignment Study LIST OF FIGURES Figure 1. Figure 2 Figure 3. Figure 4. Figure 5. Figure 6. Figure T Figure 8. Figure 9. Figure 10. Figure 11 Figure 12. Figure 13. Figure 14. Figure 15. Figure 16. Figure 17_ Figure 18. Figure 19. Figure 20. Figure 21 Figure 22. Figure 23_ Figure 24. Figure 25. Figure 26. Figure 27. Figure 28. Figure 29. Figure 30. Figure 31. Figure 32. Figure 33. Figure 34. Figure 35. Figure 36. Figure 37. Figure 38 Corridor Study Area Work Plan Weld County Road 11/York Street & Weld County Road 2/East 168th Avenue Intersection — Existing Features Weld County Road 15/Holly Street & Weld County Road 2/East 168th Avenue Intersection — Existing Features Weld County Road 17/Quebec Street & Weld County Road 2/East 168th Avenue Intersection — Existing Features Weld County Road 19/Yosemite Street & Weld County Road 2/East 168m Avenue Intersection — Existing Features Weld County Road 23 5/Tucson Street & Weld County Road 2/East 168th Avenue Intersection — Existing Features Weld County Road 11/York Street & Weld County Road 2/East 168th Avenue Intersection - Intersection Alternatives Weld County Road 15/Holly Street & Weld County Road 2/East 168th Avenue Intersection — Intersection Alternatives Weld County Road 17/Quebec Street & Weld County Road 2/East 168th Avenue Intersection — Intersection Alternatives Weld County Road 19/Yosemite Street & Weld County Road 2/East 168"' Avenue Intersection — Intersection Alternatives Weld County Road 23.5/Tucson Street & Weld County Road 2/East 168th Avenue Intersection — Intersection Alternatives Example Evaluation Matrix Weld County Road 11/York Street & Weld County Road 2/East 168th Avenue Intersection — Alternative 1 Weld County Road 11/York Street & Weld County Road 2/East 168th Avenue Intersection — Alternative 2 Weld County Road 11/York Street & Weld County Road 2/East 168th Avenue Intersection — Alternative 3 Weld County Road 11/York Street & Weld County Road 2/East 168th Avenue Intersection — Recommended Alternative Weld County Road 11/York Street & Weld County Road 2/East 168th Avenue Intersection Typical Sections Weld County Road 15/Holly Street & Weld County Road 2/East 168th Avenue Intersection — Alternative 1 Weld County Road 15/Holly Street & Weld County Road 2/East 168th Avenue Intersection — Alternative 2 Weld County Road 15/Holly Street & Weld County Road 2/East 168th Avenue Intersection - Alternative 3 Weld County Road 15/Holly Street & Weld County Road 2/East 168th Avenue Intersection — Recommended Alternative Weld County Road 15/Holly Street & Weld County Road 2/East 168t'' Avenue Intersection Typical Sections Weld County Road 17/Quebec Street & Weld County Road 2/East 168th Avenue Intersection - Alternative 1 - Weld County Road 17/Quebec Street & Weld County Road 2/East 168th Avenue Intersection — Alternative 2 Weld County Road 17/Quebec Street & Weld County Road 2/East 168th Avenue Intersection — Alternative 3 Weld County Road 17/Quebec Street & Weld County Road 2/East 168th Avenue Intersection — Recommended Alternative Weld County Road 17/Quebec Street & Weld County Road 2/East 168th Avenue Intersection Typical Sections Weld County Road 19/Yosemite Street & Weld County Road 2/East 168th Avenue Intersection - Alternative 1 Weld County Road 19/Yosemite Street & Weld County Road 2/East 168th Avenue Intersection - Alternative 2 Weld Weld Weld Weld Weld Weld Weld Weld County County County County County County County County Road Road Road Road Road Road Road Road 19/Yosemite Street & Weld County Road 2/East 168th 19/Yosemite Street & Weld County Road 2/East 168th 23.5/Tucson Street & Weld County Road 2/East 168th 23.5/Tucson Street & Weld County Road 2/East 168th 23.5/Tucson Street & Weld County Road 2/East 168th 23 5/Tucson Street & Weld County Road 2/East 168th 23.5/Tucson Street & Weld County Road 2/East 168th 23.5/Tucson Street & Weld County Road 2/East 168th APPENDIX (SEPARATE DOCUMENT) Evaluation Matrices Local Agencies Comments Public Comments Page 1 Avenue Intersection — Recommended Alternative Avenue Intersection Typical Sections Avenue Intersection — Alternative 1 Avenue Intersection — Alternative 2 Avenue Intersection — Alternative 3 Avenue Intersection — Alternative 3a Avenue Intersection — Recommended Alternative Avenue Intersection Typical Sections 2 4 5 6 7 8 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 21 22 23 24 25 27 28 29 30 31 33 34 35 36 38 39 40 41 42 43 45 46 111 FELSI;I_ It( HOLT & ULLEV I(; ( )(taller 200S Wilk COLORADO AUA.MIS cOtTN FY COLORADO City of Thornton Weld/Adams County Line Crossroads Alignment Study I. INTRODUCTION Project Background The border between Weld County and Adams County is known as Weld County Road 2 (WCR 2), or East 168`h Avenue. Due to survey correction lines, many of the north -south roadways that intersect East 168`h Avenue are offset, making it difficult for traffic to smoothly travel across the joint county boundary, as well as complicating how multiple jurisdictions can properly plan for future transportation needs_ Study Purpose The purpose of this study is to establish preferred north -south alignments that will provide a smooth transition across East 168' Avenue for the following five disjointed intersections ► Weld County Road (WCR) 11/York Street ► Weld County Road (WCR) 15/Holly Street ► Weld County Road (WCR) 17/Quebec Street ► Weld County Road (WCR) 19/Yosemite Street ► Weld County Road (WCR) 23.5/Tucson Street The preferred alignments will improve the connectivity between the jurisdictions so that future traffic demands can be accommodated with planned improvements By identifying preferred alignments at this time. this study will serve as a guide for Weld County. Adams County, the City and County of Broomfield, the City of Northglenn and the City of Thornton to preserve rights -of -way for the alignments so they may be constructed as needed Planning now will allow the improvements to be implemented in an orderly fashion and will allow for minimized disruption in the future. The study locations are shown graphically in Figure 1. Figure 1. Corridor Study Area Study Process The study was initiated with an extensive data collection effort to better understand the opportunities and the constraints around each study location Comprehensive plans and transportation plans from the communities located within the study locations were compiled and reviewed, parcel ownership information was collected: known development plans were collected: environmental data compiled by the Counties was mapped, and other relevant information was collected. With the collected data and with input from the public (including representatives of the local entities), a number of alternatives were identified for each intersection within the study area. These alternatives were then evaluated based on a number of factors including. ► Community Input ► Community Impacts ► Geometrics ► Safety ► Environmental Impacts ► Construction Costs FFELSBURc H O LT 6: ULLEvIG Page 1 October 2008 Wi`Pe COLORADO ADAMS COUNTY C OLOU A OO of orthgknn City of Thornton Weld/Adams County Line Crossroads Alignment Study The results of this evaluation process were then discussed with the local entity representatives, and preliminary preferred alternatives for each intersection were identified. The preliminary preferred alternatives were presented to the public for comment. and additional refinements of the alternatives were made. The results of the study were then assembled into this Report The study process is shown graphically in Figure 2 Figure 2. Work Plan DATA COLLECTION • rtevtew Prtvi nut Stud's: • C0MM' it Avs vNe Date • mint r Supplement Cat a ♦ Prepare (lase Mapptn0 IDENTIFY RANGE OF ALTERNATIVES • ldent.fy Opponws'he, and own nine s ✓ Develop Alitemet.ws with the Public end Local Nunn*: ALTERNATIVES ANALYSIS • Conrrunity input • clowning, y worey. ▪ Geanetr.c. ✓ Safety ✓ t w.renmentei impel. ✓ Construct/ w. Cc.tt+ rEVALUATION OF ALTERNATIVES �i 't;f haute intaSection "� AltttMUYtt w im n n be re WC Select a Preferred Alternative Evalate Preferred AlttlMtite (Dots it Merl GNU & Objectives') PREPARE DOCUMENTATION ♦ Daly Rowe ✓ c.na1 Merin Local Local Local Public Local Local Local Public Agency Agency Agency Open Agency Agency Agency Open Meeting meeting Meeting Mouse Meeting Meeting Meeting House 1/41 4/i 4111 411.1 4/19 Silo ewe Nile l ■ _A.._ A u is L 1 C I N v 4 L v e M E to T P P G P AM Public Input Weld County, Adams County, the City and County of Broomfield, the City of Northglenn and the City of Thornton have been actively involved throughout this planning process A Local Agency Advisory Group. comprised of representatives of the local governments, met six times throughout the study to provide input on data needs_ the identification of alternatives and the evaluation of those alternatives Input from the Local Agency Advisory Group has been instrumental in selecting the preferred alternative for each intersection. The public has also been an integral part of this process An initial open house for the project was held in April 2008 to solicit input from the public on concerns, issues, and opportunities for the alternatives at each study location. The public was asked to participate by "voting" for their preferred alternative at each study location Over 37 residents attended the initial open house for the project A second and final open house for the project was held in July 2008 to receive input from the public on the preliminary preferred alternatives. over 19 residents attended. In order to ensure maximum public involvement for both open house meetings, notification was sent to all of the property owners within the study area (over 900 total notices were mailed) and a notice was posted on Weld County's web site. FELSBU Rt HOLT & ULLIEV tG Page 2 October 2008 COLOR ADO ADAMS f ut N I l COLOR A 00 -At City of Thornton Weld/Adams County Line Crossroads Alignment Study II. EXISTING AND FUTURE CONDITIONS The information that was collected during the data collection process served as the basis for creating and evaluating alternative alignments The sources of the data collection were Weld County, Adams County and local municipalities. Existing land use plans, transportation plans and specific development plans were compiled as well as aerial photography, right-of-way and parcel ownership information, environmental considerations and USGS topographic information All of this information, along with numerous site visits, was assembled to determine the physical characteristics of each study location As part of the data collection effort, several comprehensive and transportation plans from the communities within the study area were collected. The plans include the following: ► Adams County Comprehensive Plan (Completed January 2004) ► Adams County Transportation Plan (Adopted April 1996) ► City and County of Broomfield 2005 Comprehensive Plan (Adopted October 25. 2005) ► City and County of Broomfield 2005 Transportation Plan (Completed November 2005) ► City of Thornton Comprehensive Plan (Completed September 2007) ► Thornton Thoroughfare Plan (Completed August 2000) ► City of Northglenn Municipal Code ► Weld County Roadway Classification Plan (June 2002) This chapter summarizes the information extracted from these plans and the information received from Weld County's and Adams County's Geographical Information System (GIS) departments Collected Data Information GIS information obtained from the Counties includes the following ► Parcel Boundaries Planned Land Uses Existing Floodplain Limits Jurisdictional Boundaries Aerial Photography (Flown in April - June 2006) This information was subsidized with site observations to collect other pertinent data required for this study such as: ► Existing Utility Information ► Residence and Other Structure Locations ► Drainageways and Drainage Facilities (Ditches, Pipes. etc ) ► Gas and Oil Features The above information is shown graphically in Figures 3 through 7 FELSI3URG HOLT & ULLEVIG Page 3 October 2008 11111c, ADAMS COUNTY COLORADO �%_ City of tee Thornton Weld/Adams County Line Crossroads Alignment Study Weld County Road 11/York Street & Weld County Road 2/East 168th Avenue Intersection illFELSRURc 1tOLT & ULLEV)G Page 4 Existing Features r>.> Legend Parcel Information Flood Plain Information \1/4sit-aite Residential (Oared Oa lrno rrwrtlon) \\\\NR\ Public (Land Use Information) North Figure 3 October 2008 COLORADO ADAMS COUNTY �V City of srThornton Weld/Adams County Line Crossroads Alignment Study Weld County Road 15/Holly Street & Weld County Road 2/East 168th Avenue Intersection r.2: _. •- r pFR SBURG rd11OLT & ULLEVIG Page 5 4 ntraS Existing Features Legend Parcel Information Estate Residential (Land Use Irrforrnationt North Figure 4 October 2008 COLORADO Ark ‘467 ADAMS COUNTY City of `Itr' Thornton Weld/Adams County Line Crossroads Alignment Study Weld County Road 17/Quebec Street & Weld County Road 2/East 168th Avenue Intersection E\isting Features Legend t _. Parcel Information _ Flood Plain Information cEstate Residential (Lana Use Information) North Figure 5 �FEEsBuRG IIOLT & U'LLEVIG Page 6 October 2008 COLORADO ADAMS COUNTY �k , City of lv' Thornton col-OsADO Weld/Adams County Line Crossroads Alignment Study Weld County Road 19/Yosemite Street & Weld County Road 2/East 168th Avenue Intersection Existing Features l>\ North Figure 6 IFELSBURG i 11OLT 6c ULLEVIG Page 7 October 2008 Weld County Road 23.5/Tucson Street & Weld County Road 2/East 168th Avenue Intersection \0\\\\\\\\\\�• Or ice. porad\\\\� `�N. ks t_ t\\.\\ it. eouhttit\\\ tt� rN NWNar rarer::iaNaletZOVA4itAtirjr�iir��ir �r�ii►a%�i�i ��rif;i iiON 44 "Wan 4i gf \ ik\t\ T\7\`\\`t \ q\\\\\*\\\\ \\\`\\\\\\ `' \ ``\\``\\\\\\\\ \�\ \\\\ . \\\ \\ \\\ \\\ \\\ \\\ \\\.• .�.�•�\\\• \\��. \� \ •\__X\\,\‘ \\\: `` s (Lena Use Intor at ) Gtc )r6rcudBttUL Uar et U.•uiAllouu4 n't4;\\ 111k COLORADO ADAMS t ( )t \'TY COLORADO mIes City of Thornton Weld/Adams County Line Crossroads Alignment Study III. IDENTIFICATION OF ALTERNATIVES Design Parameters Before any alternatives for the study intersections could be developed, basic design parameters had to be established that could be independent and different for each intersection. Once the design parameter information was gathered from the respective agencies, this information was presented to the local agencies and preferred design parameters were established for each intersection It was noted that these design parameters might have to be flexible for certain areas within the study area as the nature of the surrounding area changes The final design parameters for the intersection improvements should adhere to current approved design criteria from the applicable agencies or to criteria as established by the current version of American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials (AASHTO) guidelines. Weld County Road 11 / York Street Design Parameters Design Element Units Roadway Classification Major Arterial Posted Speed Limit 45 MPH Maximum Design Speed 55 MPH Minimum Lane Width 12 Feet Minimum Driving Lanes 4 Curb and Gutter Type Type 2LSection iII: Minimum Right -of -Way Width 150 r '. Horizontal Alignment Minimum Curve Radius 1190 Feet Minimum Stopping Sight Distance 325 Feet Minimum Length of Tangents Between All Curves 200 Feet Minimum Clear Zone From the Face of Curb 14-16 Feet Superelevation (e max)(M-203-12 Superelevation Streets) 4% Typical Minimum Median Width (BOC to BOC) 18 Feet Typical Minimum Median Width with Left Turn Lane (BOC to BOC) 5 Feet Intersection Design Minimum Curb Return Radii (Varies Depending on Intersection) 35 Feet Permissible Intersection Angles 75 Degrees Sidewalk 8' Width Detached Weld County Road 15/ Holly Street Design Parameters Design Element Unit Roadway Classification Minor Arterial Posted Speed Limit 45 MPH Maximum Design Speed 55 MPH Minimum Lane Width 12 Feet Minimum Driving Lanes 4 Curb ana Gutter Type Type 2 (Section IIB) Minimum Right -of -Way Width 120 Feet Horizontal Alignment Minimum Curve Radius 1190 Feet Minimum Stopping Sight Distance 400 Feet Minimum Length of Tangents Between All Curves 200 Feet Minimum Clear Zone From the Face of Curb 14-16 Feet Superelevation (e max)(M-203-12 Superelevation Streets) 4% Typical Minimum Median Width BOC to BOG, 11 Feet Typical Minimum Median Wdth with Left Turn Lane BOC to BCC) - F rt Intersection Design Minimum Curb Return Radii Vanes Depending on Intersection) 35 F- yet Permissible Intersection Angles 75 Degrees Sidewalk 10' Width Weld County Road 17/ Quebec Street Design Parameters Design Element units Roadway Classification Major Arterial Posted Speed Limit 45 MPH Maximum Design Speed 55 MPH Minimum Lane Width 12 Feet Minimum Driving Lanes 4 Curb and Gutter Type Type 2 (Section lee) Minimum Right -of -Way Width - 150 Feet Horizontal Alignment Minimum Curve Radius 1190 Feet Minimum Stopping Sht Distance 400 Feet Minimum Length of Tangents Between All Curves 200 Feet Minimum Clear Zone From the Face of Curb 14-16 Feet Superelevation (e max)(M-203-12 Supereleiation Streets) 4% Typical Minimum Median Width (BOC to BOC) 14 Feet Typical Minimum Median Width with Left Turn Lane (BOC to BOC ) 5 Feet Intersection Design Minimum Curb Return Radii (Varies Depending on Intersection) 30 Feet Permissible Intersection Angles - Degrees Sidewalk 10' Width FEL_SBU RG H O L T 62. ULLEVIG Page 9 October 2008 MSc. COLORADO City of Thornton Weld/Adams County Line Crossroads Alignment Study Weld County Road 19/ Yosemite Street Design Parameters Design Element Units Roadway Classificaton Minor Arterial Posted Speed Limit 45 MPH Maximum Design Speed 55 MPH Minimum Lane Width 12 Feet Minimum Driving Lanes 4 Curb and Gutter Type Type 2 (Section IIB) Minimum Right -of -Way Width 120 t -or Horizontal Alignment Minimum Curve Radius 1190 _ Feet Minimum Stopping Sight Distance 400 Feet Minimum Length of Tangents Between All Curves 200 Feet Minimum Clear Zone From the Face of Curb 14-16 Feet Superelevation (e max)(M-203-12 Superelevation Streets) 4% Typical Minimum Median Width'BOC to BOC) 14 Feet Typical Minimum Median Width with Left Turn Lane (BOC to BOC) - Feet Intersection Design Minimum Curb Return Radii (Varies Depending on Intersection) ?.0 Feet Permissible Intersection Angles - Deciree Sidewalk 10' Width Weld County Road 23.5/ Tucson Street Design Parameters Design Element Roadway Classification Local Road Posted Speed Limit 45 MPH Maximum Design Speed 55 MPH Minimum Lane Width 12 Feet Minimum Driving Lanes 2 Curb and Gutter Type Type 2 (Section IIB) Minimum Right -of -Way Width 60 Feet Horizontal Alignment Minimum Curve Radius 1 190 Feet Minimum Stopping Sight Distance _00 Feet Minimum l ength of Tangents Between All Curves 13C Feet Minimum Clear Zone From the Face of Curb 14-16 Feet Superelevation (e maxxM-203-12 Superelevation Streets) 4% Typical Minimum Median Width (BOC to BOC) - Feet Typical Minimum Median Width with Left Tern Lane (BOC to BOC) - Feet Inter•,ection Design Minimum Curb Return Radii (Varies Depending on Intersection) 30 Feet Permissible Intersection Angles 90 r Degrees Sidewalk /Vidth Attached Construction and Right-of-way Schedule At the time of writing this Report, no specific schedule has been identified for purchasing rights -of -way and constructing any of the intersection improvements for the intersections identified in the corridor study area The construction schedule for any of the designated intersection improvements will be highly dependent on the growth patterns in the corridor study area The jurisdictional local agencies within the project corridor will use this study as a basis to obtain rights -of -way for the intersection improvements as development occurs. Rights -of -way not obtained through the development process will be purchased as needed Furthermore, as development occurs, it is anticipated that developments adjacent to the applicable intersections will be responsible for the construction of the intersection improvements as a means to mitigate their traffic impacts. The Counties and local agencies within the project corridor will ultimately be responsible for those portions not funded by adjacent developments Generation of Alternatives After the data collection process, several alternatives for each intersection were generated for the corridor study area The alternatives were generated based on input received from the public and the local agencies The alternatives that were initially generated were sent to the local agencies for comments, and were refined after comments were received. New alternatives and refinements of existing alternatives has been an ongoing effort with additional input from the public and the local agencies The different alternatives for each intersection that were evaluated for this study are shown on Figures 8 through 12 PI FELSKU Rc; HOLT & ULLEVIG Page 10 October 2008 6g. 44,h liDe. COLORADO ADAMS COUNTY COLORADO At City of Ite" Thornton Weld/Adams County Line Crossroads Alignment Study Weld County Road 11/York Street & Weld County Road 2/East 168th Avenue Intersection PI FEI.5RURG iIIOLT 5c ULLEVIG Page 11 Intersection Alternatives Legend Alternative 2 Alternative 3 North Figure ti October 2008 (//,4z, Wilk COLORADO ADAMS COUNTY COLORADO Ate, City of re Thornton Weld/Adams County Line Crossroads Alignment Study Weld County Road 15/Holly Street & Weld County Road 2/East 168th Avenue Intersection • dFELSBURG CIlOLT & ULLEVIG oS lotion Page 12 Intersection Alternatives Legend Alternative 2 Alternative 3 North Figure 9 October 2008 COLORADO _Amy ADAMS COUNTY COLORADO AL City of Ile Thornton Weld/Adams County Line Crossroads Alignment Study Weld County Road 17/Quebec Street & Weld County Road 2/East 168th Avenue Intersection Intersection Alternatives PI FEE SRt1RG rd11( LT & ULLEVIG Page 13 l>2 North ()chiller Weld County Road 19/Yosemite Street & Weld County Road 2/East 168th Avenue Intersection COLORADO ADAMS COUNTY COLORADO If `t City of Thornton Weld/Adams County Line Crossroads Alignment Study Weld County Road 23.5/Tucson Street & Weld County Road 2/East 168th Avenue Intersection FLSRURG (I .IOLT 6& ULLEVIG Page 15 Intersection Alternatives Alternative 2 Alternative 3 Alternative 3a North Figure 12 October 2008 Wilk COLORADO AN\iS( t►l \(1 COLORADO City of Thornton Weld/Adams County Line Crossroads Alignment Study IV. EVALUATION & RECOMMENDATION OF ALTERNATIVES The alternatives for each intersection identified within the corridor study area were evaluated independent of the other intersections. The criterion that was utilized for the evaluation process is listed below: Community Input (Weight Factor — 2.0) Refers to the general public opinion for the alternative alignments simply measured as favorable or not Community Impacts (Weight Factor — 2.0) Access is a measure of the level of convenience and clarity of access to existing and future developments and adjacent property owners. Right-of-way Impacts is a measure of the amount and number of severed parcels, proximity impacts. and/or displaced residences that would be required of existing and future developments in order to construct the alternative. Current and Future Development Impacts is a measure of consistency with current and future residential and commercial development plans. Geometrics (Weight Factor — 1.0) • Geometrics are a measure on how well the alternative achieves the preferred design criteria established by the local agencies Safety (Weight Factor — 2.0) • Safety is a measure of expected conflict points for the traveling public and improvement of existing problems or high accident locations. Environmental Impacts (Weight Factor -V 1.0) Refers to unfavorable impacts to known environmental conditions. This would include a measure of each alternatives impact on the existing flood plain and/or existing drainage facilities This would also include any impacts to known existing historical buildings or sites or mining hazards. Construction Costs (Weight Factor — 2.0) ✓ Construction Cost is a relative comparison of costs to construct the alternative These criteria were incorporated into an evaluation matrix as shown in Figure 13 Each alternative for the different intersections was then evaluated and compared to the other alternatives for that intersection in order to determine the preferred alternative that scored the best for each intersection. The evaluation panel consisted of representatives from the local agencies (Weld County, Adams County, City and County of Broomfield, City of Northglenn and City of Thornton) and a representative from Felsburg Holt & Ullevig. After the preferred alternative for each intersection was determined, the preferred alternatives were then presented to the public at the project's final open house Figure 13. Example Evaluation Matrix Weld/Adams County Line Crossroads Alignment Study v,du ctlonMatrix WC It 11/York Sueet/Wl.lt 1J1i t$tI nvr•inn' Tina Submitted by <Insert Name Marto Alturnativu I Altornattvu 2 Alteinatrvo 3 Lvaluation Criteria `"dtIOW i .r; ti>r •. Scoring Weighted - "t St ruing Sconng Weighted i c'•" Scrxtnp oring Weighted °i••Scoring 1 o mnullMly hoot Gsws/Pubic Op ton orAtterretne V rttr, Pr-rneC or Pvbac Open Houav 0 �x. 0 00 Community impacts Acts rny1aCta Rpnlot--wwy Injpr hu C urrrn r 000 Fu tune terehr.men t Impette Arstys ter Community Imports Geometries estgn errors Aonee0 WI ',Orly erwMenmamtal Impacts read Mootibmenatle Fscritsvn ,t.:.......:.., r. v., .. . 'tv> t ' & 0 CA, 0 00 ::,. Construction Cost _7-.:,tro_hrr. ,.,auot 2 L 0.00 0.00 0 00 Ild (IuwN81 Sctrt" is IM.•1.•nwl) 0.01 000 J o0 The oratorio are scored from I to 0 with I being the best irt 1401 .Ut_.Vlt,v it Felsburg Holt & Ullevig City of T nui Tie... 4113) This chapter describes the advantages and disadvantages of each alternative for each intersection in detail_ PFELSHU R(; 4HOLT St ULLEV(U Page 16 October 2008 Wilk COLORADO ADAMS COUN'T'Y CU LOU A 00 .A1 City of IfThornton Weld/Adams County Line Crossroads Alignment Study Weld County Road 11/York Street & Weld County Road 2/East 168th Avenue Intersection This offset intersection is surrounded by four different jurisdictions - the City and County of Broomfield west of Weld County Road 11, the City of Northglenn east of Weld County Road 11, the City of Thornton west of York Street and Adams County east of York Street. Other characteristics of this intersection include: ► Subdivision within the City of Thornton named North Creek Farms ► Existing Utilities such as the Standley Battery Wells and Kerr McGee Storage Tanks ► Proposed Utilities such as the proposed Chemical Storage and Feed System the City of Northglenn is designing over their Existing Force Main ► An Existing Detention Pond, Drainageway and Wetlands along with the Existing Floodplain ► A 600 -foot Separation occurs between the Existing Intersections The following three alternatives were developed for this intersection. Alternative 1 Alternative 1 shifts Weld County Road 11 to the east to realign with the existing East 168th Avenue and York Street intersection. This alignment shift occurs on the City of Northglenn parcel. Access for the residences on the current Weld County Road 11 can obtain access through a cul-de-sac that accesses East 168th Avenue or this access may be relocated to the realigned Weld County Road 11. Details such as access locations should be finalized during the final design process of the intersection improvements. Alternative 1 Advantages: ► Does not impact North Creek Farm Subdivision ► Achieves Intersection Design Criteria ► Right-of-way can be obtained from City of Northglenn Parcel (north of East 168th Avenue) ► Minimal Impacts to Existing Wetlands and Drainageways ► Utilizes Existing Road and Right-of-way South of East 168th Avenue ► Public's Favorite (13 votes) ► Lower Anticipated Construction Costs ($4.43 million) Alternative 1 Disadvantages: ► Does not compliment City and County of Broomfield's Transportation Plan ► Bisects City of Northglenn Parcel ► Impacts Kerr-McGee Oil Storage Tanks • Requires an Intergovernmental Agreement (IGA) or Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) between Agencies PI FFl sBuRG EJIOLT & ULLEVIG Page 17 Alternative 1 FN North Figure 14 October 2008 Wilk COLORADO ADAMS COUNTY COLORADO At City of srThornton Weld/Adams County Line Crossroads Alignment Study Weld County Road 11/York Street & Weld County Road 2/East 168th Avenue Intersection Alternative 2 Alternative 2 leaves Weld County Road 11 in its present location and shifts York Street to the west to realign with the existing East 168th Avenue and Weld County Road 11 intersection. This alignment shift occurs within the platted North Creek Farm subdivision that is located within the City of Thornton jurisdiction. Access for the residences west of Weld County Road 11 would have to be directly on Weld County Road 11 unless a secondary street and access locations were developed on the west side of the residences. Details such as access locations should be finalized during the final design process of the intersection improvements. Alternative 2 Advantages: ► Does not bisect City of Northglenn Parcel ► Compliments City and County of Broomfield's Transportation Plan ► Utilizes Existing Road and Right-of-way North of East 168th Avenue Alternative 2 Disadvantages: ► Major Impacts to North Creek Farm subdivision (17 platted lots) ► Major Impacts to the Existing Detention Pond approved by Urban Drainage and Flood Control District ► Impacts Standley Battery Well (south of East 168th Avenue) ► Impacts Existing Wetlands ► Not Favored by Public (0 Votes) ► Higher Anticipated Construction Costs ($5.28 million) sl a. IFILLabalbra r sea .. �— a—.. . — .... .. .... ..�a� PPF E L:51%111U, i IIOLT Sc ULLEVIG Alternative 2 r\J North --- Wine-inns r r awayaa.Ma alai WAS s am arm 1 Figure 15 Page 18 October 2008 (1O ;PIy Wilk COLORADO ADAMS COUNTY At City of itThornton Weld/Adams County Line Crossroads Alignment Study Weld County Road 11/York Street & Weld County Road 2/East 168th Avenue Intersection Alternative 3 Alternative 3 splits the difference between the two existing intersections at Weld County Road 11 and York Street on East 168th Avenue. This alignment shift occurs within a portion of the platted North Creek Farm subdivision that is located within the City of Thornton jurisdiction and on a portion of the City of Northglenn parcel. Access for the residences west of Weld County Road 11 could be provided directly onto Weld County Road 11 or a cul-de-sac and combined access road via to East 168th Avenue or Weld County Road 11. Details such as access locations should be finalized during the final design process of the intersection improvements. Alternative 3 Advantages: Does not Impact Existing Residences Minimal Impacts to Existing Utilities Alternative 3 Disadvantages: ► Impacts North Creek Farm subdivision (4 platted lots) ► Impacts Existing Detention Pond approved by Urban Drainage and Flood Control District ► Impacts Existing Wetlands ► Does not Utilire Any Existing Rights -of -way ► Leaves a Remnant Parcel for the City of Northglenn ► Not Favored by Public (3 Votes) ► Higher Anticipated Construction Costs ($5.17 million) iFEISRURG l i O L T 6c ULLEVIG Page 19 Alternative 3 V\1 A, North Figure Ie October 2008 Mit; IlliDe COLORADO \I►\MMS C11CN I 1 COLORADO City of Thornton Weld/Adams County Line Crossroads Alignment Study Preferred Alternative Due to several factors including community input. fewer development impacts, fewer wetland and drainage impacts and lower anticipated construction costs, Alternative 1 is the preferred alternative for this intersection. The City and County of Broomfield is currently working with a planned development north of East 168' Avenue on the west side of Weld County Road 11 Broomfield City Council has approved the "257 Land Plan" PUD Plan and preliminary plat for this development. It is understood between the agencies that no improvements will be completed to Weld County Road 11 or York Street, until development occurs in the surrounding area to assist in planning and funding the required improvements The City and County of Broomfield has an adopted vision and development approvals that have determined their preferred intersection configuration for East 168t Avenue and Weld County Road 11 that does not coincide with this study's preferred intersection configuration. However, the City and County of Broomfield is interested in working with the City of Northglenn, the City of Thornton. Adams County and Weld County to determine the final design and funding scenarios for the study's preferred alternative when the intersection improvements are warranted. With this in mind, it may be in all the agencies best interests to enter into an Intergovernmental Agreement (IGA) or Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) between the agencies that better defines responsibilities, funding sources and timelines. The recommend alternative for this intersection is shown on Figure 17. The anticipated typical sections for the interim and ultimate roadways for this intersection are shown on Figure 18 FELSBURG H(.ILT & ULLEVIG Page 20 October 2008 16,(//z4 Wilk COLORADO ADA►VIS COUNTY City of rThornton Weld/Adams County Line Crossroads Alignment Study Weld County Road 11/York Street & Weld County Road 2/East 168th Avenue Intersection rdFFLSBURG IIOLT & ULLEVIG rlorlhgienn tornge ystean Page 21 ;;. 0 Weld County Road 11 Recommended Alternative North Figure 17 October 2008 (O\ ft lot WUDc. COLORADO ADAMS COUNTY COLORADO �efe City of Thornton Weld/Adams County Line Crossroads Alignment Study Weld County Road 11/York Street & Weld County Road 2/East 168th Avenue Intersection Typical Sections Weld County Road 11/York Street (Interim) 150' RIGHT OF WAY 5' SIDEWAL 12' 12' TRAVEL LANE as TRAVEL LANE LOCAL ROAD `ug/:s'ct Coo city L oe icji 11 CV_ LL 150' RIGHT OF WAY r 5' SIDEWALK ;L sst (CLIJUtSocm)) ie 4' SIDEWALK 12' 12' 21' 12' 12' TRAVEL LANE TRAVEL LANE MEDIAN/ TURN LANE TRAVEL LANE TRAVEL LANE 4' B' SIDEWALK MAJOR ARTERIAL \VVY/CSi C4 ©'S7lkl[fij' I,to n ?≥/Iin:iit; e C 6s3U91 Awci9`i1wKI ? 140' RIGHT OF WAY B' 4' SIDEWALK 12' 12' 17 12' 12' TRAVEL LANE TRAVEL LANE MEDIAN/ TURN LANE TRAVEL LANE TRAVEL LANE 4 MAJOR ARTERIAL 4' 8' SIDEWALK Figure 18 (FE L.SBU RG lOLl & ULLEVIG Page 22 October 2008 0 ADAMS COUNTY COLORADO s`k- City of rThornton Weld/Adams County Line Crossroads Alignment Study Weld County Road 15/Holly Street & Weld County Road 2/East 168th Avenue Intersection This offset intersection falls within the City of Thornton and Adams County jurisdiction south of East 168th Avenue and Weld County north of East 168th Avenue. Holly Street south of East 168th Avenue has been improved and is currently paved. Weld County Road 15 north of East 168th Avenue is an existing gravel road. Other characteristics of this intersection include: Subdivision within Adams County named Eagle Shadow Known Existing Utilities such as oil wells and gas regulator stations Existing Irrigation Pond resides on the Albert Sack's Parcel A 450 -foot Separation occurs between the Existing Intersections Residence at end of Holly Street (Paul Jacobucci) The following three alternatives were developed for this intersection. Alternative 1 Alternative 1 shifts Holly Street to the west to realign with the existing East 168th Avenue and Weld County Road 15 intersection. This alignment shift occurs on the Albert Sack's parcel within the City of Thornton jurisdiction. Access for the residence south of the existing East 168th Avenue and Holly Street intersection can obtain access through a cul-de-sac that accesses East 168th Avenue or this access may be relocated to the realigned Holly Street. Details such as access locations should be finalized during the final design process of the intersection improvements. Alternative 1 Advantages: Minimal Impacts to Existing Residences Moves Holly Street away from the Eagle Shadow subdivision Achieves Intersection Design Criteria Utilizes Existing Road and Right-of-way North of East 168th Avenue Highest Public Approval (7 Votes) Lowest Anticipated Construction Costs ($4.58 million) Alternative 1 Disadvantages: ► Impacts Existing Irrigation Pond (Sack's Parcel) ► Bisects Sack's Parcel South of East 168th Avenue 111 FEISBU RG rt. HOLT ULLEVIU October 2008 Page 23 Alternative 1 179 North Figure 19 I a it@ COLORADO ADAMS COUNTY COLORADO _4t City of ifThornton Weld/Adams County Line Crossroads Alignment Study Weld County Road 15/Holly Street & Weld County Road 2/East 168th Avenue Intersection Alternative 2 Alternative 2 leaves Holly Street in its present location and shifts Weld County Road 15 to the east to realign with the existing East 168th Avenue and Holly Street intersection. This alignment shift would have detrimental impacts to the Paul Jacobucci residence with the proposed roadway going through the existing residence. Access for the residences adjacent to existing Weld County Road 15 would have to be realigned directly onto the realigned Weld County Road 15 or can be consolidated with a single access on Weld County Road 11 or East 168th Avenue. Details such as access locations should be finalized during the final design process of the intersection improvements. Alternative 2 Advantages: ► Does not Bisect Parcels South of East 168th Avenue ► Achieves Intersection Design Criteria ► Utilizes Existing Road and Right-of-way South of East 168th Avenue ► Moderate Public Approval (5 Votes) Alternative 2 Disadvantages: ► Major Impacts to the Existing Residence north of East 168th Avenue (Paul Jacobucci) a Bisects Parcels North of East 168th Avenue ► Higher Anticipated Construction Costs ($4.89 million) Alternative 2 17N North PFELSBURG 4IIOLT �c ULLEVIG Page, 24 wme ADAMS COUNTY COLORADO COLORADO At City of ifThornton Weld/Adams County Line Crossroads Alignment Study Weld County Road 15/Holly Street & Weld County Road 2/East 168th Avenue Intersection Alternative 3 Alternative 3 shifts the Weld County Road 15 to the west to a new intersection location. This alignment shift would have minimal impacts to existing features; however, the intersection improvements would cost more to construct and this alternative does not achieve the established design parameters with sub -par horizontal curves. Existing accesses on Weld County Road 15 and Holly Street could remain with a connecting road to East 168th Avenue or to the realigned alignments. Details such as access locations should be finalized during the final design process of the intersection improvements. Alternative 3 Advantages: ► Minimal Impacts to Existing Residences ► Moves Holly Street away from the Eagle Shadow subdivision Alternative 3 Disadvantages: ► Does Not Achieve Intersection Design Speed Criteria ► Does not Utilize Existing Rights -of -way and Roadway ► Bisects Parcels on Both Sides of East 168th Avenue ► Lowest Public Approval (3 Votes) ► Higher Anticipated Construction Costs ($4.86 million) . FEISBURG i HOLT & ULLEVIC) Page 25 Alternative 3 r7N North Figure 21 October 2008 I'/ i� is: COLORADO ADAMS COUNTY art City of Thornton Weld/Adams County Line Crossroads Alignment Study Preferred Alternative Alternative 1 and 2 were very comparable after the evaluation process, however, due to lower right-of-way costs including the Jacobucci residence and due to lower anticipated construction costs, Alternative 1 is the preferred alternative for this intersection The recommend alternative for this intersection is shown on Figure 22. The anticipated typical sections for the interim and ultimate roadways for this intersection are shown on Figure 23. IFELSIIURG HOLT Si ULLEVIG Page 26 October 2008 (//cs, 1 � COLORADO ADAMS COUNTY COLORADO A4 City of Ite Thornton Weld/Adams County Line Crossroads Alignment Study Weld County Road 15/Holly Street & Weld County Road 2/East 168th Avenue Intersection --- 1 V`• In iii ♦ !-h �4�d•1 r` PFFI BURG i H O L T 61. ULLEVIG Page 27 Recommended Alternative Weld County .Road 15 D� North Figure 22 October 2008 (ite "DC. COLORADO ADAMS COUNTY 4'. City of Ars Thornton it Weld/Adams County Line Crossroads Alignment Study Weld County Road 15/Holly Street & Weld County Road 2/East 168th Avenue Intersection Typical Sections Weld County Road 15/Holly Street (Interim) 120' RIGHT OF WAY LOCAL ROAD Vi®LC. ©county L"3@ ici `J L3/CJ©ty ,iculi _ &S;c 120' RIGHT OF WAY 10' SIDEWALK • IL IL II It IL TRAVEL LANE 4 TRAVEL LANE 0 MEDIN/ TURN LANE <N TRAVEL LANE i TRAVEL LANE i MINOR ARTERIAL SUS ©Mari i igicoDP.l(G /Awca 1IvIct9 (UJ; 140' RIGHT OF WAY 10' SIDEWALK 4' 8' 1 1 8' SIDEWALK pFEISRURG !IOLT {Sc ULLEVIC 12' 12' 17' 12' 12' TRAVEL LANE TRAVEL LANE MEDIAN/ TURN LANE MAJOR ARTERIAL TRAVEL LANE 4 TRAVEL LANE 4 SIDEWALK Figure ?3 Page 28 October 2008 fel 111k. COLORADO ADAMS COUNTY COLORADO 4% City of 1r Thornton Weld/Adams County Line Crossroads Alignment Study Weld County Road 17/Quebec Street & Weld County Road 2/East 168th Avenue intersection This offset intersection falls within only 2 jurisdictions - Adams County south of East 168th Avenue and Weld County north of East 168th Avenue. Originally, only two alternatives were developed for this intersection; however, a 3rd alternative was generated after the initial open house based on adjacent property owner input. Quebec Street south of East 168th Avenue has been improved and is currently paved. Weld County Road 17 north of East 168th Avenue is an existing gravel road. Other characteristics of this intersection include: • Subdivision within Adams County named Eagle Shadow Current Land Uses are Predominately Agriculture and Estate Residential • A 400 -foot Separation occurs between the Existing Intersections The following three alternatives were developed for this intersection. Alternative 1 Alternative 1 leaves Quebec Street in its present location and shifts Weld County Road 17 to the east to realign with the existing East 168th Avenue and Quebec Street intersection. This alignment shift occurs on the Wycoff parcel that is currently undeveloped. Access for the residences adjacent to existing Weld County Road 17 could be realigned and connected directly onto the realigned Weld County Road 17 alignment or they can be consolidated with a single access to East 168th Avenue as shown in Figure 24. Details such as access locations should be finalized during the final design process of the intersection improvements. Alternative 1 Advantages: ► Minimal Impacts to the Existing Residences in the Eagle Shadow subdivision ► Utilizes Existing Road and Right-of-way South of East 168th Avenue ► Crosses Drainageway Approximately at the Existing Road Crossing ► Most Favored by Public (14 Votes) ► Lowest Anticipated Construction Costs ($5.00 million) Alternative 1 Disadvantages: ► Bisects the Parcel North of East 168th Avenue FELSBURG rE IIOLT ULLEVIG Page 29 Alternative 1 VN North Figure 24 October 2008 ft Wilk COLORADO ADAMS COUNTY At City of ri Thornton Weld/Adams County Line Crossroads Alignment Study Weld County Road 17/Quebec Street & Weld County Road 2/East 168th Avenue Intersection Alternative 2 Alternative 2 shifts Quebec Street to the west to realign with the existing East 168th Avenue and Weld County Road 17 intersection. This alignment shift occurs within the Eagle Shadow subdivision where existing residences are constructed. Residences in the Eagle Shadow subdivision on Popular Court not impacted by this alignment shift could have their access relocated to East 167th Place. Details such as access locations should be finalized during the final design process of the intersection improvements. Alternative 2 Advantages: Utilizes Existing Road and Right-of-way North of East 168th Avenue Does not Bisect the Parcel North of East 168th Avenue Alternative 2 Disadvantages: ► Major Impacts to Existing Residences in the Eagle Shadow subdivision ► Expensive Construction Costs due to the Cost of Purchasing Existing Residences ► Least Favored by Public (4 Votes) ► Highest Anticipated Construction Costs ($9.39 million) Alternath 17N North Figure 25 PI FELSBURG �IIOLI & ULLEVIG Page 30 October 2008 i`&ice\ � o 11116c. COLORADO ADAMS COUNTY if t city of Thornton Weld/Adams County Line Crossroads Alignment Study Weld County Road 17/Quebec Street & Weld County Road 2/East 168th Avenue Intersection Alternative 3 Alternative 3 is a variation of Alternative 1 that leaves Quebec Street in its present location and shifts Weld County Road 17 to the east to realign with the existing East 168th Avenue and Quebec Street intersection. After the initial public open house, the re -configured Weld County Road 17 alignment was developed in cooperation with the Wycoffs whose parcel was mostly impacted by Alternative 1. The intention of this alternative is to preserve a corridor of developable land between the existing Weld County Road 17 and the realigned Weld County Road 17 that could be developed into estate residential. This realignment of Weld County Road 17 would also provide a consolidated access for the existing residences on the west side of Weld County Road 17 that would have one access point to the realigned Weld County Road 17 alignment or to East 168th Avenue. Details such as access locations should be finalized during the final design process of the intersection improvements. Alternative 3 Advantages: ► Minimal Impacts to the Existing Residences in the Eagle Shadow subdivision ► Minimal Impacts to the Existing Residences adjacent to Weld County Road 17 ► Consolidates Access from Existing Residences adjacent to Weld County Road 17 ► Utilizes Existing Road and Right-of-way South of East 168th Avenue Low Anticipated Construction Costs ($6.68 million) Alternative 3 Disadvantages: Bisects the Parcel North of East 168th Avenue Alternative North Figure 2n PI FFI�511O11O 4)IOLT & ULLEVIG Page 31 October 2008 Ili • WliDc. COLORADO ADO ( U('NTY COLORADO m•Ii" City of Thornton Weld/Adams County Line Crossroads Alignment Study Preferred Alternative Alternatives 1 and 3 were very comparable after the evaluation process Even though Alternative 3 has a high anticipated construction costs, other factors such as lower access impacts, lower current and future development impacts and approval from the general public including the property owner most impacted lead to Alternative 3 being the preferred alternative for this intersection The recommend alternative for this intersection is shown on Figure 27. The anticipated typical sections for the interim and ultimate roadways for this intersection are shown on Figure 28 piFELSKU RCS HOLT & ULLEVIG Page 32 October 2008 (/,‘„, � o COLORADO ADAMS COUNTY COL.014^00 At City of if Thornton Weld/Adams County Line Crossroads Alignment Study Weld County Road 17/Quebec Street & Weld County Road 2/East 168th Avenue Intersection Quebec Street PP rdFELSRURU non- 64 ULLEVIG Weld County Road 17 Page 33 Recommended Alternativ e North Figure 27 October 2008 6-frtcra., COLORADO ADAMS COUNTY COLORADO At City of an --Nye Thornton Weld/Adams County Line Crossroads Alignment Study Weld County Road 17/Quebec Street & Weld County Road 2/East 168th Avenue Intersection Typical Sections Weld County Road 17/Quebec Street (Interim) 150' RIGHT OF WAY FELSBURG IIOLT & ULLEVIG 5' SIDEWALK r 5' SIDEWALK 12' LOCAL ROAD TRAVEL LANE 2r 12' TRAVEL LAN E Ma ©@icuili. Lp3ct 1 T/CQ)uc l© r ec°c c i UJU l t i) 150' RIGHT OF WAY 10' 4' SIDEWALK 12' 12' 11 17 17 TRAVEL LANE 2� TRAVEL LANE MEDIAN/ TURN LANE TRAVEL LANE TRAVEL LANE MAJOR ARTERIAL 4' 10' SIDEWALK okcia: (Gm..-Iui) : LL3@ ja 2/LJ s [ `J 03 ro Lil\dc cw.m 140' RIGHT OF WAY 8' 4' SIDEWALK 17 12' 17' 17 12' TRAVEL LANE TRAVEL LANE MEDIAN/ TURN LANE gqa TRAVEL LANE TRAVEL LAN E MAJOR ARTERIAL 4' 8' SIDEWALK 1 Figure 28 Page 34 October 2008 (//i#, � o 11111k. COLORADO ADAMS COUNTY COLORADO s`t City of lysi Thornton Weld/Adams County Line Crossroads Alignment Study Weld County Road 19/Yosemite Street & Weld County Road 2,/East 168th Avenue Intersection This offset intersection falls within only 2 jurisdictions - Adams County south of East 168th Avenue and Weld County north of East 168th Avenue. Only two alternatives were developed for this intersection. Both Yosemite Street south of East 168th Avenue and Weld County Road 17 north of East 168th Avenue are existing gravel roads. Other characteristics of this intersection include: Existing Utilities include Noble Energy Gas Regulator Station Current Land Uses are Predominately Agriculture and Estate Residential A 435 -foot Separation occurs between the Existing Intersections The following two alternatives were developed for this intersection. Alternative 1 Alternative 1 leaves Yosemite Street in its present location and shifts Weld County Road 19 to the east to realign with the existing East 168th Avenue and Yosemite Street intersection. This alignment shift occurs on the Robert Seltzer parcel that is currently undeveloped. Access for the single residence adjacent to existing Weld County Road 19 could be realigned and connected directly onto the realigned Weld County Road 19 alignment. Details such as access locations should be finalized during the final design process of the intersection improvements. Alternative 1 Advantages: Utilizes Existing Road and Right-of-way South of East 168th Avenue Lowest Anticipated Construction Costs ($4.40 million) Alternative 1 Disadvantages: ► Bisects Parcels North of East 168th Avenue ► Minimal Impacts to Existing Residences ► Lower Public Preference (0 Votes) Alternative 1 r North Figure 29 PPFELSBURG HOLT & ULLEVIG Page 35 October 2008 Wilk COLORADO t ADAMS COUNTY At City of r Thornton Weld/Adams County Line Crossroads Alignment Study Weld County Road 19/Yosemite Street & Weld County Road 2/East 168th Avenue Intersection Alternative 2 Alternative 2 shifts Yosemite Street to the west to realign with the existing East 168th Avenue and Weld County Road 19 intersection. This alignment shift occurs on Seltzer Farms parcel where an existing residence is constructed on Yosemite Street. Access for this residence could be redirected to the realigned Yosemite Street or to East 168th Avenue. Details such as access locations should be finalized during the final design process of the intersection improvements. Alternative 2 Advantages: ► Utilizes Existing Road and Right-of-way North of East 168th Avenue ► Higher Public Approval (10 Votes) ► Comparable Anticipated Construction Costs ($4.60 million) Alternative 2 Disadvantages: ► Bisects Parcels South of East 168th Avenue ► Minimal Impacts to Existing Residences pFELSRIJR(; rd iloLT & U'LLEVIG Page 36 Alternative 2 1771 North Figure 30 October 2008 COWRADO au:U I«WNTY COLONAOO sk,t City of Thornton Weld/Adams County Line Crossroads Alignment Study Preferred Alternative From a design standpoint and based on impacts to existing features. both of these alternatives are very comparable At the initial public open house, Alternative 2 was unanimously selected as the preferred alternative by the public. Alternative 2 could have more impacts to the existing residence south of East 168`r Avenue due to the close proximity of Yosemite. however. when Yosemite Street is improved, it is anticipated the widening will occur to the east away from the residence. Considering these factors, Alternative 2 was selected as the preferred alternative for this intersection. The recommend alternative for this intersection is shown on Figure 31. The anticipated typical sections for the interim and ultimate roadways for this intersection are shown on Figure 32. FELSBURO (EHOLT & ULLEVIG Page 37 October 20(N � o Intim COLORADO ADAMS COUNTY COLORADO •4t City of tsar -tie Thornton Weld/Adams County Line Crossroads Alignment Study Weld County Road 19/Yosemite Street & Weld County Road 2/East 168th Avenue Intersection Yosemite Street OPFEI.SBURG 11 O LT & ULLEVIG Page 38 Recommended Alternative North Figure 31 October 2008 cet. Wilk COLORADO ADAMS COUNTY COLORADO At City of -Ve Thornton Weld/Adams County Line Crossroads Alignment Study Weld County Road 19/Yosemite Street & Weld County Road 2/East 168th Avenue Intersection Typical Sections r f _ Weld County Road 19/Yosemite Street (Interim) 120' RIGHT OF WAY f 5' SIDEWALK - 12' 12' TRAVEL LANE TRAVEL LANE 1 5' SIDEWALK LOCAL ROAD ©C;=©L4Irilf J&x `I 2/ U et9 C�C�: �i.rr, :�i I1.Jliiir 120' RIGHT OF WAY 10' SIDEWALK 4' IC i[ in It IL TRAVEL LANE 11,if TRAVEL LANE MEDIAN/ TURN LANE TRAVEL LANE TRAVEL LANE i 4' 10' SIDEWALK MINOR ARTERIAL ,V k L@ 2,Co)ufnlf Hama`.'41.4-41stiti ("I �xtgoh;lrn /°AM`ti)Nocc; ((UJ_Ilnffit j 140' RIGHT OF WAY 8' 4' SIDEWALK 12' 17 17' 17 12' TRAVEL LANE TRAVEL LANE MEDIAN/ TURN LANE MAJOR ARTERIAL TRAVEL LANE TRAVEL LANE 4' Be SIDEWALK Figure 32 . FEL.SBURG dROLl & ULLEVIG Page 39 October 2008 46/"AL COLORADO ADAMS COUNTY COLORADO IfV City of Thornton Weld/Adams County Line Crossroads Alignment Study Weld County Road 23.5/Tucson Street & Weld County Road 2/East 168th Avenue Intersection This offset intersection falls within only 2 jurisdictions - Adams County south of East 168th Avenue and Weld County north of East 168th Avenue. Three alternatives were developed for this intersection; however, the third alternative was refined after the initial open house based on adjacent property owner input. Tucson Street south of East 168th Avenue has been improved and is currently paved. Weld County Road 23.5 north of East 168th Avenue is an existing gravel road. Parcels around this intersection are drastically different from those shown in the aerial photography due to heavy mining activity occurring within these parcels. Other characteristics of this intersection include: Both Existing Intersections are located within the Existing Flood Plain An Existing Residence is Located on the North Side of the Tucson Street/East 168th Avenue Intersection (Cristofer Muhler) Current Land Uses are Predominately Agriculture A 460 -foot Separation occurs between the Existing Intersections The following three alternatives were developed for this intersection. Alternative 1 Alternative 1 leaves Weld County Road 23.5 in its present location and shifts Tucson Street to the west to realign with the existing 168th Avenue and Weld County Road 23.5 intersection. This alignment shift occurs on the Apex Material Specialists LLC parcel that is currently being heavily mined. Alternative 1 Advantages: ► No Impacts to Existing Residences ► Utilizes Existing Road and Right-of-way North of East 168th Avenue ► Does Not Bisect Future Mining Area North of East 168th Avenue (Hall -Irwin) ► Does Not Bisect Parcels North of East 168th Avenue ► Comparable Anticipated Construction Costs ($3.37 million) Alternative 1 Disadvantages: ► Impacts the Gravel Mining Operation South of East 168th Avenue (Front Range Aggregates) ► Requires Earthwork for the Roadway to fill in Mining Operation South of East 168th Avenue ► Bisects Parcel South of East 168th Avenue Alternative 1 viN North Fi g►u re 33 iFELSBURG MOL.T & ULLEVIG Page 40 October 2008 T o ito(*; COLORADO ADAMS COUNTY COLORADO At City of 1y Thornton Weld/Adams County Line Crossroads Alignment Study Weld County Road 23.5/Tucson Street & Weld County Road 2/East 168th Avenue Intersection Alternative 2 Alternative 2 shifts Weld County Road 23.5 to the east to realign with the existing East 168th Avenue and Tucson Street intersection. This alignment shift occurs within the Lot Holding Investments LLC parcel that has recently been permitted to be mined. This alternative would have detrimental impacts to the Cristofer Muhler parcel and residence. Alternative 2 Advantages: ► Does Not Impact Mining Operations south of East 168th Avenue (Front Range Aggregates) ► Utilizes Existing Road and Right-of-way south of East 168th Avenue ► Does Not Bisect Parcel south of East 168th Avenue ► Comparable Anticipated Construction Costs ($3.40 million) Alternative 2 Disadvantages: Major Impacts to the Existing Residence north of East 168th Avenue (Cristofer Muhler) Bisects Future Mining Area north of East 168th Avenue (Hall -Irwin) Bisects Parcels North of East 168th Avenue rdFElSBUR(1 Hotel-& LLEVIG Alternative 2 17 71 North Figure 34 October 2008 ;,• it-rs Wilk o COLORADO forii‘ usy) ADAMS COUNTY �`� City of rThornton Weld/Adams County Line Crossroads Alignment Study Weld County Road 23.5/Tucson Street & Weld County Road 2/East 168th Avenue Intersection Alternative 3 Alternative 3 splits the difference between the two existing intersections at Weld County Road 23.5 and Tucson Street on East 168th Avenue. This alignment shift would affect the proposed mining operations north of East 168th Avenue and the existing mining operations south of East 168th Avenue equally. Alternative 3 Advantages: ► Does Not Require the Relocation of the Existing Residence North of East 168th Avenue (Cristofer Muhler) ► Bisects Both Mining Operations North and South of East 168th Avenue Equally ► Most Favored by Public (4 Votes) ► Comparable Anticipated Construction Costs ($3.23 million) Alternative 3 Disadvantages: ► Does Not Utilize any Existing Rights -of -way and Roadways Alternative 3 P n North Figure 35 iFELSBURG HOLT & ULLEVIG Page 42 October 2008 (414 t Wilk COLORADO ADAMS COUNTY m`1. City of lir Thornton Weld/Adams County Line Crossroads Alignment Study Weld County Road 23.5/Tucson Street & Weld County Road 2/Last 168th Avenue Intersection Alternative 3a Alternative 3 is a variation of Alternative 3 as the proposed intersection shifts slightly to the east towards Tucson Street. This alignment shift would affect the proposed mining operations north of East 168th Avenue more than the existing mining operations south of East 168th Avenue. Alternative 3a Advantages: ► Does Not Require the Relocation of the Existing Residence North of East 168th Avenue (Cristofer Muhler) ► Minimal Impacts to the Mining Operations South of East 168th Avenue (Front Range Aggregates) ► Comparable Anticipated Construction Costs Alternative 3a Disadvantages: Does Not Utilize any Existing Rights -of -way and Roadways Bisects Parcels on Both Sides of 168th Avenue Bisects Future Mining Area North of East 168th Avenue (Hall -Irwin) Alternative 3a /\ North Fi tore 3t' EFELSRURG HOLT & ULLEVIG Page 43 October 2008 ADAMS COUNTY COLORADO 4: City of Thornton Weld/Adams County Line Crossroads Alignment Study Preferred Alternative After the evaluation process. Alternative 3 was the preferred alternative for this intersection. However, due to mining operations constraining the alternatives that were developed for this intersection, additional coordination was conducted with Front Range Aggregates and Hall -Irwin in order to better define potential cost implications with implementing any of the intersection alternatives. Front Range Aggregates: Front Range Aggregates reclamation plan shows permanent water storage and is already permitted for this use. The mining adjacent to Tucson Street is in the process of being completed for permanent water storage, but this pond has not been lined yet. In order to revise Front Range Aggregates reclamation plan to accommodate a realigned Tucson Street, the costs would have to include a re -engineering of the site and an amendment to their reclamation plan that would have to be approved by the Colorado Division of Reclamation Mining and Safety Other concerns associated with reducing their current permanent water storage facility is that this reduction in size may be less attractive to prospective purchasers of the water storage and may yield this site as unusable as well The lining of the Front Range Aggregates is anticipated to occur this fall (2008) If Front Range Aggregates reclamation strategy needs to be altered. it would need to be done before they begin the placement of the liner. Hall -Irwin: Hall -Irwin is already in the process of constructing slurry walls for the mining operations and tentatively plans to start gravel mining next summer (2009). Hall -Irwin does show a water storage reservoir on their reclamation plan that has already been sold to Aurora Water for future water storage Recommendation: Due to the mining constraints around this intersection and based on the low traffic demand on Weld County Road 23.5 (198 vehicles per day) and Tucson Street today, Weld County Road 23.5 and Tucson Street are not anticipated to be a major traffic route. Therefore. the final recommendation for this intersection is to leave it in its current configuration The recommend alternative for this intersection is shown on Figure 37 The anticipated typical sections for the interim and ultimate roadways for this intersection are shown on Figure 38. rd. FELSPURG HOLT a ULLEVIG Page 44 October 2008 act COLORADO ADAMS COUNTY At City of ifThornton Weld/Adams County Line Crossroads Alignment Study Weld County Road 23.5/Tucson Street & Weld County Road 2/East 168th Avenue Intersection 4FELSRURG 11OL1 & ULLEVIG Page 45 Recommended Alternative V aer a. . ► -. •44t 4 North Figure 37 October 2008 ‘s(t2 I o COLORADO ADAMS COUNTY COLORADO .43 City of rThornton Weld/Adams County Line Crossroads Alignment Study Weld County Road 23.5/Tucson Street & Weld County Road 2/East 168th Avenue Intersection Typical Sections u� D Wow-ineL c I fl %lf , ci itc'®at iffi.Inftnr rffrAUMrw !►, )) 60' RIGHT OF WAY 5' SIDEWALK 12' 12' eaim _ Lu7(01K11h it j I HC) TRAVEL LANE TRAVEL LANE LOCAL ROAD 140' RIGHT OF WAY r 5' SIDEWALK 8' 4' SIDEWALK 12' 12' 17' 12' 12' TRAVEL LANE TRAVEL LANE IAEDIAN/ TURN LANE TRAVEL LANE TRAVEL LANE MAJOR ARTERIAL 4' 8' SIDEWALK gttre 38 FELSRURG fril I -I O L T & ULLEVIG Page 46 October 2008 Wilk COLORADO ADAMS COIN 11' COLORADO sir City of Thornton Weld/Adams County Line Crossroads Alignment Study V. CONCLUSION I ntersection Configurations The layout of the intersection configurations of the preferred alternatives as outlined in Chapter 4 are approximate in the capacity that the alignments can shift subtly in order to better fit the planned developments and existing features surrounding the intersections, however, the overall functionality of the intersections should not be compromised as a result of any modifications. It is envisioned that East 168"' Avenue and the north -south roadways would be constructed as 2 lanes plus auxiliary lanes where required in an initial phase with the ultimate roadway width being constructed when traffic demand warrants additional lanes Study Implementation Process When the study is complete, it is anticipated that every agency will have a different approval and implementation process. Weld County staff will present the findings of the study to the Board of County Commissioners for consideration and approval at a public hearing Adams County will amend the County's transportation plan to include the intersection alignments and designate classifications and ultimate build - out widths for the crossroads and East 168' Avenue. Other agencies may not formally approve the final report through their city councils, but it is anticipated that they will still utilize the report as a planning tool as development occurs in the study corridor area. In order to confirm that the involved agencies are planning these recommended intersection improvements cooperatively, Intergovernmental Agreements (IGAs) between the involved agencies may be pursued to ensure that the intersection improvements are preserved for future implementation. Intersection Improvement Implementation Process Presently, there is no specific schedule for the construction of these identified intersection improvements. The construction schedule for these intersection improvements will be highly dependent on the growth and development that occurs within the corridor study area. Weld County, Adams County, the City and County of Broomfield, the City of Northglenn and the City of Thornton will use this study as a basis to preserve rights -of -way for the intersection improvements as development in the area occurs Rights -of -way not preserved through the development process may be purchased as needed. Furthermore, as development occurs, it is anticipated that developments adjacent to the intersections will be responsible for the construction required to mitigate their impacts_ The jurisdictional agencies surrounding each intersection within the corridor study area will be responsible for the improvements not funded by developments. 41 FELSNURG HO)LT & ULLEVIG Page 47 October 2008 Selena Baltierra • • __bject: Esther Gesick RE: USR18-0130, BOCC meeting of July 10, 2019 - all remaining files. From: wwycoffbn7@aol.com <wwycoffbn7@aol.com> Sent: Monday, July 8, 2019 11:45 AM To: Esther Gesick <egesick@weldgov.com> Subject: USR18-0130, BOCC meeting of July 10, 2019 - all remaining files. Caution: This email originated from outside of Weld County Government. Do not click links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe. MS. Gesick, Attached are the remaining files for the Commissioners' use in deciding the outcome of USR18-0130. It is the City of Thornton Water Project. Please let me know if there is anything I need to do. Thank you. Best Regards, Bill Wycoff 303.659.7259 1 F- z N WC R 6 168th AVE 160th AVE.' 144th AVE 136th AVE 28th AVE 120th AVE 112th AVE 0104th J m10 J Q W 0 92nd AVE 88th V eFuture Growth Boundary City Boundary School Proposed Transit Stop P VA RTD Park n Ride South Platte River Railroad Roadways Proposed Interchanges Floodplain Water Storage and Gravel Pits Residential Estate Residential Low Residential Medium Residential High Urban Village Mixed Use Gateway/Mixed Use Commercial Regional Commercial Employment Center Employment Center - North Washington Overlay Industrial Institutional Parks and Open Space Urban Reserve 1 inch = 7.501 feet In N r CO in M 0 Co N N 0 c CCDE0 a m ° -n2 noOct > ooDc a>)cn Q flH L U CD U U) h; N (� N L r CD 10 _c o co -=.22 c a 3 0 `a v, U —L N o,oa�awo ≥.�NL L a U al O o o >. C -a un1 c Ct (1)o m al w Q. O o C 0 QoaQmC- U 7- _ E E vi o vtounor. Dr° H co a c it J 43 7 LL W O A c U1 WELD/ADAM/ COUflTY LiflE CROffROAD/ ALIGflEflT ITUDY WCR 17 Quebec fteet (Alternative I Aerial Flown April -June 2006 umiti roux II' COLOR A DO City of Thornton F ELSA,' RC; Itt)LI& l: LLL\ IC North i(R4\\ � o WI`DC. COLORADO ADAMS COUNTY COLORADO At City of if Thornton Weld/Adams County Line Crossroads Alignment Study Weld County Road 17/Quebec Street & Weld County Road 2/East 168th Avenue Intersection Eagle Shadow iFEI.SRURG I OLT & ULLEVIG Detention Pond Weld County Rod 17 Page 33 Recommended Alternative North Figure 27 October 2008 I I 2 I 3 I a I 5 I 6 S r ° i ISSUED FOR PERMIT NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION 3 R g A • Q od O i Cj • • '�V -e-r _� 6 r 4_e ° e e ° . ° ° -�,G� 111 �a ./ ate- CENTERLINE fL1DN9.11fi930 L gEg . 0. FU URE QUEBEC S _ `� Y I _—,.� �" — ° o g C _ — •, —_—w—__—___--_—.,,—_—«—__..__ CENIERUNE —J RADIUS =101050 rc z °r CI Ex I F gR ig I c8 a 8 I— LL! Z 0 S Q ! C÷ 0 100 300 300 PRELIMINARY QUEE STREET REALIGNME Scale In Feel F r VERIFY SCALE W 1 UR MOWN., OM eoe DATE MA. 3016 PROD 70906 DWG SHEET of SPWURL SPWPATH FILENAME WCPOrm000E9n PLOT DATE 201607106 PLOT THE 9.2600 AM OOctober 12, 2018 Weld Board of County Commissioners 915 10th St Greeley, CO 80631 Subject Thornton Water Project Pipeline Location Dear Commissioners. The city of Thornton (Thornton) has contacted us requesting easement for the Thornton Water Project (TWP) pipeline across property we own along Weld County Road (CR) 17 between CR 2 and CR 4 Thornton has informed us that Weld County has directed them to keep the TWP pipeline outside of Weld County rights -of -way (ROW) and to pursue easements with private property owners. o In 2008 Weld County adopted a plan for realignment of Quebec Ave/CR 17 that would place the realigned section of the road on our property. The study can be found at: http://www.adcogov.org/sites/default/files/482_0 pdf. The relevant page is attached. Thornton's representatives have met with me on several occasions to determine a routing that will least affect the future of the property, and it is our desire to minimize encumbrances to maintain maximum flexibility Thornton has proposed several alternatives for routing the pipeline, including purchase of an existing unused easement Drawings are attached We believe it is in our best interest to pursue the route across our property that places the waterline in the east side of the realigned ROW of Quebec Ave/CR 17. This will allow the greatest flexibility by maximizing useable land along the east side of CR 17. Please consider committing to follow the Recommended Alternative road plan and allow Thornton to install their pipeline in the future CR 17 ROW It meets Thornton's needs and is in our best interest as Weld County residents and property owners. Thank you for your consideration. For questions please contact us at wwycoffbn7@aol.com or 303-659-7259. Respectfully, OA arrvi 2 U) William R Wycoff Attachments ,idgt.,•L.-a A Adriann C. Wycoff Silk COLORADO ADAMS COUNTY 40 City of Thornton Weld/Adams County Line Crossroads Alignment Study Weld County Road 17/Quebec Street & Weld County Road 2/East 168th Avenue Intersection Ouebtc Street FELSBURC MOLT lit ULLEVIG i'agu Recommended Alternative North Figure 27 October 2008 I I v I I I . , I , . ISSUED FOR PERMIT NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION _ to =(I1 _ —_ y - -y �l — — \MUD Lb 'MAYA t it PRELIMINARY QUEBEC T1.110411•411A Mall STREET REALIGNMENT . mama nue tl I o ,` O- '3 ID Re Mb 4. scomvacfte I LP I re. VIM OW r.... ..w.. P.V.M. o.elrege. +m o.FaaRne 44.O1ti m.. 1 I 1 1 I I A I L I E NOTE ' ®� P,ac RU0TL0N 1WP MU LPEASEMENT E I FRpTSTINIO1 IMAP, 0 TO 100 ISO SAL, M F..1 ISSUED FOR PERMIT NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION t 0 - ��Ij I /- SEIM 3 SEC 32 T -1-N, R -67-W NO PROPERTY to INFORMATION COLLECTED gg Y I a F; 11 t§ ic t al B 9l ,Mp i PAROW MT a 4 +jl APRON UST MD ST MIICOT MCI FOURS WW1 IE/� EATENENT -.4ATE BARBED Y CV 9 3 Ii Y TWO_ WW RN FUN _ —RIVi— — RN(W MY NW _NNW _- — WM�_ — ' Q ei — — _ Aa ii - ! _— — _ 3 —.T--_ __ _— —lafl__—_ OE Esil ---"--L --BM - �—pr — _ __Jhp�' It r p — �— W LINE SWIM SEC M G— u— — A EL 1 EL — -W ----- I y z `� ; a h p9 y (I _�. f ♦ ss N w w oo w wee W SW 1 + 1 EL — FEAfi c. �CTIPP., U USRXX-XXXX T'OPM1O PERMIT MAP 1 Q^'' n. lyif c}" G r mreTROEUMPPELINEwaaNT REDS ENERGY TUSA)FWEL ECO OW c c c EP AEEMEMT PEIONNEN WO § 5( — -, [ C a 1 r y € I WROTEdeIII 0 WV Po, 15 iFlEOi41Y I SO GAIL PPELRE SMELHO M�qN {�( I N.ORTN,�SGA9 PREPUCES CO 1-1 (FJ L aa I IEI6FTSC I TT 1 II a0 PN 146933000019 I I ii I LOT B RECORDED EXEMPTION SW1/4 I 1469 -33 -3 -RE 2813 SEC 33 I REc 2011.511 T -1-N, R -67-W RAN —i I a 5 Y --r I - -RN'F- - - RW— P1W— RMI— - -RIII - -f4W- - RSV — RAr -ch-�� E SO ROW FVTUNE 0.0C1,110NMAlORMATFI = ., w W WW W w w w w — - - - -- - - - - '-` - `�' ---` - - - - - -"-'-�-•- .'_' -- _ wo I ��-wW- — —ww- — —ryw�_ - -ww- - �_ww- - iNM CATEP®vFOIE W - -01W--RF,y-- - -wW- POW OW il OWO PAldt SHEET tl W' LPMPAT4 FILENAME WTYPRW1 Pin PLOT DATE 0016000 PLOT TWO EII',10AM T _ I ]I ISSUED FOR PERMIT NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION 1 i 0 6 — a SE1/4 SEC 32 T -1-N, R -67-W NO PROPERTY INFORMATION COLLECTED q ? IL ] Cl Cl � 1 ggs P ani a rp MlMNE 6wnN EEC 1] '7? 1W ,_""tom- WRJW MT _ __ •IIU ELITISM - _ SAN - - _RAY— - - R/,N_ - qAy__ - 01 Q [ a Q a r --- my �weAiuTecwR.R. WELD COUNTY ROAD I7 � a a 0016TRHGIIOH EASEMENT USRXX-XXXX TOMOOlJwATER PROJECT PERMIT MAP 2 COT °ET'10.0'T°R - 3 �P`" __ - — -- — - a ww Q fn _ Ey [L` G EL G \' ., l _ _ _ . -- FL El IYAPl.1 _ _— -_—__ e. N 111 Y9 W i SC PERMANENT EASEI�AT .,,,.'�— S: Z J 2 1--c' -V o —� EL o rc EL EL — — — — W 4 C Z U %6D �� C C —►-- c C C C C - c C C C C 0A0PAT 6 TEMPO.. `. .iC fJ8 WP41ME EASEMENT CONSTWCIgN NWTMEMW OA91T1000CTC CO EASEMENT / SEC ,E11N] F Q t trycErtncol It I t) 90 010 wallOMeUTURE poanvl AfwOLM011 nto MO ED q�N PN 146933000019 I� LOT B RECORDED EXEMPTION 1469.333-RE2B13 REC ]SO161.] ELO VI an+/ SW1/4 wa0ma. �rRrM SEC 33 O I T -1-N R -67-W •'� w 'ma 0 m ,m , PRODsArE PRa.. mom kWNPgM OMa9 At -0] SNEET m S°'ER O'NPATH ElENMME YO'r 02Y•n PLOT ORTE ]0,0 13 PLOT ME '�E, AY I I I 1 2 1 • I 1 I e NE7/4 SEC 32 T -1-N, R -67-W LOT B EASEMENT NOTES PARCEL 14 I THAT PETROLEUM PPTLINE OWLE L6TEERAPIPE�i3 CCITO oCZRC EO ASRREECEo�Io!1,.�AIEIEI e6WY1p3OT 1673 MOTTHH13i Af'TE`o RLSS'MEREFOREE NOT SWAN ON TKO MAP RWSA0 •AIFLTTHENEINn) PANT OF (EXCEPTION 1A) I ISSUED FOR PERMIT NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION j R ! ' RECORDED EXEMPTION 1469 -32 -1 -RE 2461 LOT A RECORDED EXEMPTION 11FNSIO I .14" ° o REC. 2696,16 1469 -32 -1 -RE 2461 EEC 21191616 _ PN 146932000015 12 1 GAMED WVIE FENCE II ELEO7 EA3HO:IR Loam WEAL alarm ASSN TMPh. •DTE✓1 MY 83LEe¢PT1o1a 2114 n 141 Fo,eTRuaTlON EA9EYEN1 PN 146932000014 m ® ,E I I 6 -4 a (C NN 6l Sii EL EL EL EL — — — — — EL EL EL EL TWP PA 1 bO PER1�AENT EAffYEM C La i 6 W W W W w W W W W M W l[[i lV — EL El. EL EL EL EL EL EL — — — IR POW PYIYPE IWP Pk1 MT TFIIVUAY — EL 1 :6 9 ; 604TIO,IAPROAIMTE1 —�� COIsTR0CTI0N EASEMENT — — — -- vy -- o,,Ia y 3ba ;9 a -- ..._ .. .. ., E 3 1 3 Irr mncw EUT WELD COUNTY ROAD 17 3 4s g o �W Ln1E6wIM MY1M SEG3T _—G_ _AM — O 9 - a1 - RAY G RM' _ _a PM —s I�1 C - - A c- Am c C d- W W J i I E 1NP Pm C II SPPWMMLNT EASEMENT - C C G I G G G \ \1 - G N z 8 15 )S� _ U 1ODA61VElAS fAKMENT NdFTHEIdea 60046 ITELINCE•SLIENT NO1lFD)iN aAl,rmUCTS CO REG'Min 10 OAS PIPELINE EAMEYENT NORstliNWIPAOWCT6CO J I U a yaG i4 S ° ° �! pEc ,rC2l1]!A PaND ° REII2JTm a %.1,I n .i RFC 161346 6,41 1— 6 � a E 3 IS •6310R 31T CGN6TRIICTXY, • EAEEYENT a E Fit[]Tla,l F , e MTI aorta $• IE1f�D11b1 ' 7i _ 0 1 \J, �7♦ ° emu= CI PN 146933200024 LOT A RECORDED EXEMPTION ° 1469-33-2 RE 3201 PSC 3T6/19e 2 lib' ° RECORDED ° 1469.33-2-RECX16-0083 PN 146933200003 LOT A EXEMPTION PEG mow ° ® PN 146933200004 LOT B RECORDED EXEMPTION 1469.33-2 RECX16-0083 °4714 ° REG•2soM SW1/4, NW1/4 SEC 33 ! H0uSE Ein PN 146933200001 LOT A RE 1469 -33 -2 -RE DE EXEMPTION REL. 36.30,3 ' USRXX-XXXX PERMIT MAP 3 6 I P T -1-N, R-67 W D P P P G. P_ woo,' mARo-a 160 1s6 F , es 0 so WT Ale SMAC 1 POO! 0.3018 -WD DM. most. d �' VA°ATH FILENAME WCPer@64T PLOT DATE lOITOT13 PLOT TIME 60636 AM Karla Ford From: Sent: To: Cc: Subject: Attachments: wwycoffbn7@aol.com Saturday, October 13, 2018 12:53 PM Karla Ford Acwycoff@aol.com Wycoff request letter to the BOCC 2018-10-12-Wycoff_Letter.jpg; Att_1_Wycoff_Crossroads_Alignment.pdf, Att_2 _Wycoff_TWP_Route.pdf; Att_3_Wycoff_TWP_Routes-Detailed.pdf Caution: This email originated from outside of Weld County Government. Do not click links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe. Dear MS. Ford, Thank you for your time and help on Thursday You provided valuable information and guidance on communicating with the Board of County Commissioners After we spoke, I contacted Thornton about any existing USR related to their water pipeline plans involving our property Their response was clear in that there is no USR at this time However, Thornton wants to submit one before the end of the year. Therefore, the BOCC should be able to consider our question at this time without it being entangled with the larger project. Attached is our request letter to the Commissioners and three attachments that clarify the situation If a physical copy is needed. just let me know I can quickly get as many copies as might be needed to you. If there is anything else that is need or anything I can do to help. feel free to contact us at 303 659.7 259 or via email at wwycoffbn7©aol com Of course, I would be happy to be available to the Commission and respond to any concerns or questions that might develop Best Regards, Bill Wycoff 1 Subject RE: Wycoff request letter to the BOCC Date 10/15/2018 3 57 58 PM Mountain Standard Time °From crempel@weldgov corn To wwycoffbn7@aol com, Acwycoff@aol corn Good afternoon, Karla Ford forwarded your letter to me to process The issue you raised is under the jurisdiction of Tom Parko, Jr , Director of the Weld County Department of Planning Services Your letter is being forwarded to both the County Commissioners and Tom Parko, Jr You can expect a response shortly Once your letter of concern has been reviewed, the letter itself and the Weld County response will be listed on the Weld County Board of Commissioner's agenda as an item of communications Please see the attached letter for further information Sincere regards, Chloe A. Rempel Deputy Clerk to the Board Weld County 1150 O Street Greeley, CO 80631 tel 970-400-4213 Confidentiality Notice This electronic transmission and any attached documents or other writings are intended only for the person or entity to which it is addressed and may contain information that is privileged, confidential or otherwise protected from disclosure If you have received this communication in error, please immediately notify sender by return e-mail and destroy the communication Any disclosure, copying, distribution or the taking of any action concerning the contents of this communication or any attachments by anyone other than the (---)named recipient is strictly prohibited From: wwycoffbn7@aol.com <wwycoftbn7@aol.com> Sent: Saturday, October 13, 2018 12:53 PM To: Karla Ford <kford@weldgov.com> Cc: Acwycoff@aol.com Subject: Wycoff request letter to the BOCC Caution: This email originated from outside of Weld County Government. Do not click links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe. Dear MS. Ford, Thank you for your time and help on Thursday. You provided valuable information and guidance on communicating with the Board of County Commissioners. After we spoke, I contacted Thornton about any existing USR related to their water pipeline plans involving our property. Their response was clear in that there is no USR at this time. However, Thornton wants to submit one before the end of the year. Therefore, the BOCC should be able to consider our question at this time without it being entangled with the larger project. Attached is our request letter to the Commissioners and three attachments that clarify the situation. If a physical copy is needed, just let me know. I can quickly get as many copies as might be needed to you. If there is anything else that is need or anything I can do to help, feel free to contact us at 303.659.7259 or via email at wwycoffbn7@aol.com. Of course, I would be happy to be available to the Commission and respond to any concerns or questions that might develop. Best Regards, Bill Wycoff Subject Letter of Concern Date 10/16/2018 10 29 14 AM Mountain Standard Time °From tparko@weldgov corn To wwycoflbn7@aol corn Cc jmcdonald@weldgov corn Mr Wycoff, Good morning I am in receipt of the letter you sent to the County Commissioners dated October 12, 2018 The City of Thornton's water pipeline project requires a Use by Special Review permit from the County. The pipeline originates in Lanmer County and has to go through their permitting process prior to submitting an application with Weld County It's my understanding that the Lanmer County Commissioners continued the hearing on the pipeline until December 2018 The City of Thornton will not submit a USR application to Weld County until the Lanmer County segment is approved It's encouraging to hear that Thornton has reached out to you to discuss the project We encouraged_the City to meet with landowners prior to submitting a formal application. Weld County staff has met with representatives from the City of Thornton over the past several months and have conveyed to them that the pipeline should be placed within private easements and outside future County Right of Way (ROW) I understand that you would like to see the segment of pipeline near your property placed within the right of way The Department of Public Works can speak to the design of CR 17 and its current status, but after conferring with the Public Works Director, Jay McDonald (copied on this email) _ he also prefers that the water line be placed outside the future ROW and within a private easement I °don't expect a formal USR application from Thornton until sometime in early 2019 Once the application has been submitted noticed will go out to surrounding property owners and you will have the ability to comment on the project If you have any questions please feel free to contact me Sincerely, Tom Parko Jr Director, Department of Planning Services Weld County 970-400-3572 (office) 970-302-5333 (cell) O COLOR COLO$ADO City of Thornton Weld/Adams County Line Crossroads Alignment Study 1 Preferred Alternative Alternatives 1 and 3 were very comparable after the evaluation process Even though Alternative 3 has a high anticipated construction costs other factors such as lower access impacts lower current and future development impacts and approval from the general public including the property owner most impacted lead to Alternative 3 being the preferred alternative for this intersection The recommend alternative for this intersection is shown on Figure 27 The anticipated typical sections for the interim and ultimate roadways for this intersection are shown on Figure 28 FELSBURG C®HOIT & ULLEVIG Page 32 October 2008 I O o 1 Exhibit 06 The type is too small to display well But it is only one sentence, let me read it "Alternatives 1 and 3 were very comparable after the evaluation process Even though Alternative 3 has a [sic] high anticipated construction costs, other factors such as lower access impacts, lower current and future development impacts and approval from the general public including the property owner most impacted lead to Alternative 3 being the preferred alternative for this intersection " Weld Board of County Commissioners ODocket #2019-48, City of Thornton (USR18-0130) 2019-07-10 Bill Wycoff Chair Kirkmeyer and members of the Board of County Commissioners I am Bill Wycoff and live at 333 County Road 17 I appreciate this opportunity to speak to you about our family's thoughts and positions regarding the pipeline I particularly want to present our request for a commitment to follow the Recommended Alternative road plan changing the disjointed intersection of County Road 17 and Quebec at County Road 2 While there are a number of files in the folder I submitted for your use, I intend to speak to only four exhibits 00 to 03 The pipeline will cross County Road 2, just east of County Road 17 In doing so, it enters our farm field at south end and travels over a half mile to where it exits at the north Our situation is complicated by the disjointed intersection of Quebec and County Road 17 A study was done in 2008 to establish preferred alignments for this intersection and others on County Road 2 from Highway 85, west to Highway 7 For completeness, it is included as Exhibit 05. • Exhibit 00 shows the location relative to Thornton and its Growth Management Area (GMA) • Exhibit 01 shows the current road alignment and an initial, rejected alternative to eliminate the offset of CR 17 from Quebec In the Study it is identified as "Alternative 1" • [Highlight where our property is located.] Our house and those of many neighbors are close to the road, such that this alternative with its 150 -foot Right -of -Way (ROW), looked horrible, truly disruptive • The TWP engineers initially proposed routing the pipeline such that it crossed CR 2 and would make an immediate 90 degree turn to the west At the east side of CR 17, it would make another 90 degree turn to the north to where it exits the field near the half -section • Exhibit 02 is the Preferred Alignment as established in the Weld/Adams County Line Crossroads Alignment Study In the Study it is identified as "Alternative 3" Please note that this arrangement keeps the road as distant as possible from the houses A significant improvement. Even though the new road will occupy a much larger piece of the field, the preservation of quality of life for those in close proximity is huge The Study's conclusion regarding this intersection is Exhibit 06 The type is too small to display well But it is only two sentences, let me read it "Alternatives 1 and 3 were very comparable after the evaluation process Even though Alternative 3 has a [sic] high anticipated construction costs, other factors such as lower access impacts, lower current and future development impacts and approval from the general public including the property owner most impacted lead to Alternative 3 being the preferred alternative for this intersection " • Exhibit 03 shows the Preferred Alignment with additional details of the TWP Note that there would be approximately 300 feet between the existing CR 17 ROW and realigned road ROW. • If the Thornton were to build per their first proposal, there would remain only about 210 unencumbered feet between the existing CR 17 ROW and the realigned road ROW Using the future Right of Way path for the pipeline minimizes impact on the property It leaves more useable ground between the new road and the old approximately 2 4 to 4 6 acres more area, depending on the temporary work space arrangement • It is optimal that Thornton should place the pipeline along the Preferred Alignment path Whenever the road alignment changes, new road right of way could be placed near or over the pipeline • Expecting that the pipeline will be placed near the center of its 50 foot easement, an expansion of CR 17 from a 60 foot ROW to a 150 foot ROW could put the pipeline within the wider ROW It is not always practical that a new road would be centered on the original • It has been good working with the Thornton Water Project team They have demonstrated strong willingness to meet, discuss options and work towards mutually agreeable solutions A lot of effort and time been put into to refining the best approach that includes the road realignment • Exhibit 04 is a letter of October 12, 2018, sent to the Board of County Commissioners requesting a commitment to the Preferred Alignment so that Thornton could confidently use the east side of the proposed future Right -of -Way. Perhaps the 2008 Study's Preferred Alignment is a substantial commitment I am not sure Regardless, in light of the TWP, my request is that the Board reaffirm that commitment • I would be happy to answer any questions the Commission might have Thank you (&.I1 Thornton WATER PROJECT TYPICAL EASEMENT/ RIGHT OF WAY DIAGRAM Temporary Permanent Construction Easement Easement 50' 40' Existing County Road Pipeline Depth 4-5' Typical Pipe Diameter 48" '411116. - Existing Future Right of Way Right of Way 30' ± 60' Thornton Water Project - Segment 1 Wed County Use by Special Review Permit Application � Ex Weld County Board of County Commissioners Hearing July 10, 2019 City of Thornton a skk�' Thornton Ale TER PROJECT Mission, Vision, Ila S i and Gud'ng Prince p ues es Established by Thornton City Council: • Open communication • Collaboration with communities, property owners, public officials • Good Neighbor/Good Steward commitment • Mark Koleber Thornton Water Project Director • • • Thirty-two years with the City of Thornton Expertise in Water Resources, Water Treatment and Water Quality Participation with: The Poudre Runs Through It Study/Action Workgroup Metro Roundtable/SWSI/Colorado's Water Plan Colorado Water Congress Board of Directors Ditch Company Boards 3 • Provide critical supply by 2025 • Improve source water quality and safety • Enhance water supply reliability and drought resiliency • Meet the city's demands through 2065 Thornton Water Project Source Water • Water Supply and Storage Company (WSSC) • Legally Available • Water Court Decree • Ditch Co. Agreement Nan IM .,i, wrril �. WSSC headgate nRnr_. WSSC Res #4 LON a MONT --6R'OOMFIELD SEVERANCE WINDSOR L.,,�I JOHNSTOW / FIRESTONE FREDERICK • GREELEY J WELD 1 FORT LUPT I flogs is*. tett 44. 1 ADA h Thornton Water Project Infrastructure to deliver Source Water to Thornton's Treatment Plants WSSC Res #4 41 704ii• At" �• f . I/ • I. n R s• Poet* •fit. a �_ \ } .a. Karr Ili 'sett I. FORT R LOVELAN • %P„ c r OLU .wt 1•..d S is rend I t. t..rst Lis. HAI • NA1 Jig 'inrm f•}•}`rt JOH BERTHOUD t.irtic MEAD LONGMONT u St ins B O\U L D E R t� s BO LDE 4•ww .•rv11M ERIE 1 �1 era' 71 ;- B R{O F I E L D r_I I I Y vef- } • • 1 � WIN I:LcI 1l.1k. AULT • SEV RANCE r !FIR •NE itinf K GREELEY C W E FORT LUPT L Thornton Water Treatment Plants D D A COLORADO'S WATER F3DAIL NMI COLLABORATING ON COLORADO'S WATER FUTURE Home The Plan - The Basins The Technical Analysis Implementation Learn More PROTECTING OUR WATERSHEDS Colorado's Water Plan People love Colorado. Our iconic mountains, rivers, minerals. plains, communities, forests, snow, wildlife, and wilderness have drawn people by the millions to our centennial state. Our population has ballooned from 1 million in 1930 to over 5 million today, and could nearly double by 2060. Sustaining this growth requires water. With this projected pace of growth, how do we preserve what we love about our state? Colorado's Water Plan has answers. Colorado's Water Plan includes the Thornton Water Project 7 Properties Stewardshi Stewardship Plan will: Include community input Identify productive and sustainable land uses Incorporate community goals p P an 8 Source Water Stewardshi p • Agreement with WSSC V Historic water deliveries to other shareholders are not altered in time or quantity, their expenses not increased, nor their other rights adversely affected. • Water Court Decree ✓Water must be used by Thornton ✓Revegetation to native grasses VNon injury to other water rights 10 Project Overview • 75 mile pipeline to Thornton's Treatment Plants • Multiple Weld County Permit Segments 1 1 it Poole, Bar Il '44 r_. • :r '-41,; I WSSC Res #4 R I 'M Ft FO t 1 LOVELA.N' l i) Weld County Permit Segments • —_ LONGMONT I '-- r•BR(OOMFIFI D • bin. .p JAM ivy ItItra 14. It •R 1 I Min JOHNS ce Timnath Windsor GREELEY f Johnstown G (FORT LUPTON I • I skse) Thornton Water Treatment Plants D D A M WSSC Res #4 Wed County Permit Segment 1 12 N '-Y ,j •r .ilk l� •*r yy ij , re- • I . • - • sc R M E R A • r..�.. w %{r• • wy. IS .r, ... r.a 1•••••••, Yr FOR OLUNS LOVELANU �1 \ C.: ttt NA' L, r ring l BERTHOUD MEA WELD COUNTY SEGMENT 1 f r. Cr' .r' '• - • roa�_ ,• t 1 .i'' ,9. w • - • LDE :. • _Jt, Ya. -- ti . " fti-- I I ;--8RIO OMFIELD --NiI I I ERIE I • . ,,r w fwd+\ ..l t,tl rj-- 4-7 I 1 ``• V • i J •• AULT T • SEV RANCE NE CK 4 r eNN GREELEY I ire I,1 - WELD •1 L s-- (FORT LUPTO S1 fe; \Tr Thornton Water Treatment Plants D A • • • • • Thornton Water Project Weld County Segment 1 Buried 48 -inch water pipe Buried fiber optic cable 13.3 miles in unincorporated Weld County 2.8 miles in cities/towns 16.1 mile total length 13 LONGMONT a b. O 4 t:R 14 - FREDERICK ADAMS AVE BRLt.% a CR20 1s7 FA CR 8.75 ERI •ice( ERIE Pte' NgY 06. / �f VI" er •901 HAVE CR6 CR8 TIPPLE PKWI? BROOMFIELD THORNTON THORNTON CR 16 ._. FIRESTONE SD 1;;1 SI •41•1SI gm ST L 2ND SircC Sc1 1%RTI I Ayr CR 4 NORTHGLENN FOR 1 LU13�TON WELD COUNTY SEGMENT 1 441) Legend CR 8 •i 0 CR22 CR18h CR In 14TH ST 1 911-4 ST CR 1.2 CR B TWP PA -1 Route in Current )or Future Road Right -of -Way TWP PA -1 Route in alliMeUnincorporated Weld County TWP PA -1 Route in Incorporated Weld County Meeting the Approval Requirements Weld County Code Sec. 23-2-510 14 Common Factors • Pipeline is buried and located to minimize impacts • Property owners will receive compensation for easements and any crop damage • Impacts are temporary during construction and the property will be restored 15 Consistency with Comprehensive Plan Guiding Principles Private Property Rights Respect for Weld's Agriculture Tradition Fairness in the Land Use Change Procedure Recognition of the County's Diversity Regulations addressing land use changes Economic Growth Sec. 22-1-120 16 Consistency with Comprehensive Plan • • a Guding Principles i Private Property Rights Respect for Weld's Agriculture Tradition Fairness in the Land Use Change Procedure Recognition of the County's Diversity Regulations addressing land use changes Economic Growth 17 Consistency with Comprehensive Plan Guiding Princ' i p i es • Private Property Rights • Respect for Weld's Agriculture Tradition • Recognition of the County's Diversity • Economic Growth 18 • Work with property owner on pipeline location • Minimize impacts • Communicate acquisition process/rights • Good faith negotiations Consistency with Comprehensive PDan ResDect for Weld's A ar/culture Tradition • Passive use • Pipeline buried below plow depth • Ag uses can continue after construction • Temporary impacts only • Minimize farm operations impacts • Restore agricultural productivity 20 Consistency with Comprehensive Plan Recognition of the County's Diversity • Compatible with diverse land uses: Agriculture Low Density Residential Open Space Energy Industry 21 Consistency with Comprehensive Plan Economic Growth Pipeline has: • No impact on growth or prosperity • No impact on government services Location has been coordinated with local governments 22 Ei ht Pipeline Approval Standards g Section 23-2-480 Standards Address: 1. Impacts to agriculture 2. Effect on surrounding area development 3. Impacts on the surrounding area 4. Soil erosion, dust, and noxious weeds 5. Impacts to County residents 6. Pipeline location and alternatives 7. Natural and cultural resources 8. Stormwater runoff 23 Responsive Unformation ➢ Natural and Cultural Resources Assessments ➢ Monitoring and Mitigation Plans: ➢ Open Waters, Wetlands, and Riparian Areas ➢ Animals, Plants and Habitat ➢ Noxious Weed Management ➢Information On: ➢ Floodplains ➢ Air Quality ➢ Drainage and Erosion Control ➢ Geologic Hazards ➢ Groundwater Noise ➢ Traffic 24 Approval Standard 1 Avoid or minimize pipeline impacts to agriculture Agricultural uses can continue over top of pipeline Parallel to property lines; adjacent to Weld County future ROW Irrigation ditch crossings per company requirements Topsoil will be preserved Agricultural productivity will be restored Commitment to cooperate and coordinate with the agricultural community 25 Approva I Standard 2 Avoid adverse effects on surrounding area development • The water pipeline will not effect the rural character of Weld County • Thornton is coordinating with local governments regarding planned land use and development 26 I • Approval Standard 3 Mitigate negative impacts on the surrounding area • Property owner preference • Outside current and future planned road ROW • Adjacent to roads, ROW, existing utility easements, and property lines • Minimize road crossings • Minimize impacts to environmental resources 27 Miti gation Over 140 mitigation measures and commitments are included in the application to minimize or prevent impacts to: • • • • • • • • Agriculture Private property Health and safety Traffic/Roads Area resident and emergency responders access Water quality Air quality Drainages • • • • • • • • • • Wildlife Irrigation ditches Floodplains Natural hazard areas Natural resources Cultural resources Trees Environmentally sensitive areas Existing infrastructure Groundwater 28 Approval Standard 4 Control soil erosion, dust, and noxious weeds • Revegetate disturbed areas • • • • Approva 1 Standard 5 Implement measures to protect County residents and mitigate adverse impacts Maintain access for ' • ' emergency responders Implement Traffic Control and Safety Plans Restore construction a'. to as • ••• or sabetter condition Thornton has reviewed the staff report and the recommended conditions of approval, and wIHI implement identified measures 30 Approval Standard 6 Assess alternatives and propose a pipeline consistent with County interests and balanced resource use • A multi -step process was used to develop the water pipeline route to minimize impacts to local communities and future development 31 Approval Standard 6 Project Coordination • Weld County staff • Weld Municipalities: Greeley, Windsor, Johnstown, Frederick, Firestone, Dacono, Timnath, Milliken, Mead • Utility companies and districts • CDOT, Corps of Engineers Apr!val Standard 6 Route Deve opment Criteri a Outside current and future road ROW Adjacent to roads, existing utility easements, or property lines Minimize impacts to agricultural use Property owner preference Minimize impacts to existing structures Minimize road crossings Minimize impacts to environmental and cultural resources 37 Approval Standard 6 Preferred Route Deve opment • The process to develop the water pipeline route is a result of: Negotiations with individual property owners Detailed land, utility, or resource surveys of engineering or environmental constraints 38 Api oval Standard 6 Proposed Thornton Water Project Segment 1 Route 39 cif • 1 1196- LONGMONT.I J a t A • • -42 ell U MAW AVE_ ".2S ,1 TPPIE PKWG W 5 CR 146 L FREDERICK 5: E,RE• ERIE - C I t o r 0 �CR�td 'st L , fh a CR81St Ii 1 CRd .. ,N.:,... ...„, , ,?3 rao ,,y h7 'MTH AVE BROO S / n 5 } -• 4.. 1• FIRES TONE -- 1...u4 Da ElM ST 2:A(A AvF MAPLE 7 L CR32 3 pis l tit A a FIRESTONE SO 5.181E AVE N r N KUN •h. - • rLer Crit PI* CONE AVE T C 5 Lai R +a . LR IA •rJ _.J 1ST ST' 4TH $T $T1+ST 1 J DACOhVO Cr v GR 12 1 ELD „rig 0 x r RNTON C T 168Th AVE hA a.! \' IJORTHGLENN Ar CR 4 CR a S. 16 CR $4 CR CR2O V i CR 24 5' TTE FORT LUPTON e CR • �ii• CI 24 WELD COUNTY SEGMENT 1 Legend TWP PA -1 Route in Current or Future Road Right -of -Way TWP PA -1 Route in ellIMMUnincorporated Weld County TWP PA -1 Route in 10 &Ail C CR 32 CR30 i ST' a Cott CR 185 CR16 4,14 ST 9TH 4TH STS I • O!1? • CRtl 11111 Incorporated Weld County Segment 1 Statistcs • 13.3 miles in Weld County • 2.8 miles proposed in ROW • 10.5 miles in easements • Easements from 33 property owners 40 Aaval Standard Land Acquisiition • Respectful process for property owners • Work with property owners to minimize impacts • Preserve agricultural use • Restore property, improvements and landscaping • Non exclusive easements 41 Approval Standard 6 Land acquisition Easements to be acquired from 33 property owners in Segment 1 • All 33 have been contacted • All 33 have received offers ApPITval Standard Land Acquisition • Current negotiation challenges: Won't respond to contacts (25%) • "Project hasn't been permitted" Oil/Gas easement prices (18°A) • Will continue efforts to reach voluntary agreements 43 Standard Proposed Use of ROiN • Use of ROW requires Weld County approval. Approximately 2.3 miles is proposed in existing ROW Approximately 1/2 mile is proposed in future planned ROW 44 Approval Standard 6 Proposed Use of ROW Property owner request to minimize impacts to mining activities • 9,871 feet in ROW 45 Y tR 0 1 1 ,1 HWY 66: • co 9 Lr a I 5 INC. T: w1u1CioUsr OA 'r .1 r Approximately 1,335 feet proposed in Weld County ROW laren M_73:3 313 i1 1.1 anftt)a a1s17> - is �t ,ks1)21L) AC OR T1 AC O 11 , • Approximately 3,583 feet proposed in Weld County ROW TOWN w AIN $4 ti c C ?0,2. PRESTO TOWN OF ...113.11 ? 0005 Mtm LTIMILV 11r. •a vrzzw31 mom mgra X113 09 0 00 l'Ll to W -•'J-1154 '1 s a Is 250'•007 'k1'i}E'I'if ail; .'1' STON HWY 66 �r:•�rr r11•_•1 _•» 3=1110 r13 •1 wan Approximately 4,953 feet proposed in Weld County ROW 120975000005 READY MULE CONCRETE CO&$ C R 28 kat__ Toramt t it tva'`I I .r1 ,D VARA r• Mvriwles 2;3 l 40 12093300004) 000E RO LINDA K • t 'ail);:;101 Approval Standard 6 Proposed Use of ROW Minimize impacts to agricultural operations and residential home frontage • 300 feet in ROW Approximately 300 feet proposed in Weld County ROW • • AUKE Y4PATRICK S S r CJ ..1469,16300082 1. KLETTMAYER LI ING TRU N!ki:aa _ r F r 54. 4Ra:stAmICI : 0 .11! taintak4MAIrr rgatai TaiD Neo 21 UND Ri JOHN ttul Property owner requested to limit disturbance of planned development • 1,430 feet in ROW Approximately 1,430 feet proposed in Weld County ROW MICHAEL JD II MICHAEL Aak i?. S G R� r - a II ercizalkaa • 111 ' g2021;2221,0 M22 i • silaikatWa a ENSEEr. ENNIS T 92820000 O 8 CrOARMS ..LLP (5112 INTi) Y 46 Aaal Standard 6 Proposed Use of ROW Minimize impacts to a residential home frontage, wetlands, existing utilities, and Dry Creek RUA • 385 • Approximately 385 feet proposed in Weld County ROW ID Dry Creek RUA 47 ApPgval Standard 6 Proposed use of ROW • your, •••••••••••maTtionttlisilli 41.•-• • it : — — 7 1. ,44•1 1100 - • -amiougUtiroagsaroa...t.00-Joms.alt • - • 2044 WCR 17 Approval Standard 6 Proposed use of 110iN 0 air • • 0 • 0 I 2164 and 2198 WCR 17 I 50 Alp'Rival Standard 6 Proposed use of !Willi • O a • -41r tf • • • are • I 2034 WCR 17 I • Approval Standard 6 Proposed use of ROVV ales 0 emosimpovairse • earl • • 0 1073 WCR 17 I 52 AprMal Standard S. Proposed Use of Future I Property owner rto minimize •• to future development Weld/Adams County' Crossroads Alignment Study • ••• feet 53 LINDA ANN • SIMMONS JEFFREY J RASA MICHAEL L 141Mt - 93 MO fifraik fla tely 2,660 feet proposed Weld County ROW 146933300011 Use of ROW • Proposed use of ROW based on: Landowner request Impacts to improvements if constructed outside ROW • Possible use of ROW if landowner is unwilling to sell easeme an nt Approval Standard 6 Proposed Thornton Water Project Permit AppIicaton Segment 1 Route 55 1JNNW AVE f J) st5- ER ERIE co 1801H AVE ADAMS A'. E m w C7 TIPPLE PKW4' O GR 14•, FREDERICK CR 8.75 C w k DACONO BROOMFIELD THORNTON LEAVE 168114 AVI 41/4/F FIRESTONE BD MAPLE fl K r U) LL 0 325 CR305 r J PLATTEVILLE Lk 1t;: r,' WELD COUNTY SEGMENT 1 440 Legend TWP PA -1 Route in Current )or Future Road Right -of -Way TWP PA -1 Route in Unincorporated Weld County TWP PA -1 Route in 1 1 1 1 1 Incorporated Weld County r Approva 1 Standard 7 Protect natural and cultural resources • Natural and N o significant negative environmental impacts N o cultural sites or structures listed on the State or N ational Registerof • Approva Standard 8 Avoid adverse impact from stormwater runoff • Weld County grading permit • CDPHE Stormwater Discharge • Stormwater managementplan; BMPs • Restore disturbed areas to pre -construction grades '•' • Thornton respectfully requests approval ✓Assessments, impacts and mitigation are addressed in the Application ✓Significant adverse effects have been avoided or mitigated ✓Approval Standards have been met Thank you for your consideration Thank You! _to Thornton WA1ER PRUJLCT 59 Hello