The URL can be used to link to this page

Browse Search

Home My WebLink About20170733.tiffBEFORE THE WELD COUNTY, COLORADO, PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION OF RECOMMENDATION TO THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS Moved by Jordan Jemiola, that the following resolution be introduced for passage by the Weld County Planning Commission. Be it resolved by the Weld County Planning Commission that the application for: CASE NUMBER: PRESENTED BY: REQUEST: ORDINANCE 2017-01 ELIZABETH RELFORD IN THE MATTER OF REPEALING AND RE-ENACTING, WITH AMENDMENTS, CHAPTER 8 PUBLIC WORKS, OF THE WELD COUNTY CODE - WELD COUNTY FUNCTIONAL CLASSIFICATION MAP. be recommended favorably to the Board of County Commissioners with the following amendment: Amend the classification of County Road 29 between County Road 64 and County Road 100 to a collector status roadway on the Functional Classification Map Motion seconded by Gene Stille. VOTE: For Passage Bruce Sparrow Cherilyn Barringer Jordan Jemiola Joyce Smock Terry Cross Gene Stille Against Passage Absent Bruce Johnson Michael Wailes Tom Cope The Chair declared the resolution passed and ordered that a certified copy be forwarded with the file of this case to the Board of County Commissioner's for further proceedings. CERTIFICATION OF COPY I, Kristine Ranslem, Recording Secretary for the Weld County Planning Commission, do hereby certify that the above and foregoing resolution is a true copy of the resolution of the Planning Commission of Weld County, Colorado, adopted on February 21, 2017. Dated the 21st of February, 2017 Kristine Ranslem Secretary 2017-0733 SUMMARY OF THE WELD COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING Tuesday, February 21, 2017 A regular meeting of the Weld County Planning Commission was held in the Weld County Administration Building, Hearing Room, 1150 O Street, Greeley, Colorado. This meeting was called to order by Chair, Bruce Sparrow, at 12:30 pm. Roll Call. Present: Bruce Sparrow, Cherilyn Barringer, Gene Stille, Jordan Jemiola, Joyce Smock, Michael Wailes, Terry Cross Absent: Bruce Johnson and Tom Cope. Also Present: Chris Gathman and Diana Aungst, Department of Planning Services; Hayley Balzano, Department of Planning Services — Engineering Division; Ben Frissell, Department of Health; Elizabeth Relford, Jim Flesher, and Evan Pinkham, Public Works; Bob Choate, County Attorney, and Kris Ranslem, Secretary. Motion: Approve the February 7, 2017 Weld County Planning Commission minutes, Moved by Joyce Smock, Seconded by Gene Stille. Motion passed unanimously. CASE NUMBER: ORDINANCE 2017-01 PRESENTED BY: ELIZABETH RELFORD REQUEST: IN THE MATTER OF REPEALING AND RE-ENACTING, WITH AMENDMENTS, CHAPTER 8 PUBLIC WORKS, OF THE WELD COUNTY CODE - WELD COUNTY FUNCTIONAL CLASSIFICATION MAP. Jim Flesher, Public Works, presented Ordinance 2017-01. Mr. Flesher said that they review the impact on the roads and classify the roads into local, collector or arterial roadways. This helps identify the future road right-of-way and it is recommended to update this map every two years. The last update was done in 2015. Staff recommended the following changes: • County Road 29 is proposed as an arterial roadway. Currently Weld County does not classify any north/south road as an arterial west of Highway 85 and north of Highway 14. Therefore since County Road 29 is approximately 17 miles of continuous road paralleling Highway 85 and the communities of Nunn, Pierce, Ault, Eaton and Severance it best meets the definition of future arterial corridor. It is currently classified as a local road. They county may initially pave the roadway and then look at widening the road in the future. • The next request is to reclassify County Road 54 east of the city limits of Evans from a collector road to an arterial road east to County Road 49. The Town of Kersey has requested a future alignment to this area. • Additionally, they have been working with Cities/Towns along the County Road 54 corridor from Loveland to Kersey including CDOT and Larimer County and discussing the development of an access control plan. The working group has called this corridor the Freedom Parkway and notification of future meetings will be given to any landowners. • Extend the collector road status of County Road 66 east of County Road 43 to County Road 47. It is currently identified as a local road but seems to function as a collector road with an average daily traffic volumes ranging from 500 to 737 vehicles per day. • Extend the existing collector road status of County Road 52 from Highway 85 to County Road 43, northeast of LaSalle. • Extend the collector status of County Road 32 west of County Road 29 to the town limits of Platteville. 1 • In accordance with House Bill #161155, the designation of County Highway, which the bill defines as a four -lane controlled access county highway, better known as County Road 49 corridor from l- 76 north including the Weld County Parkway connecting to County Road 47 and up to State Highway 392. The purpose of this designation is to protect the County's investment in infrastructure in the corridor similar to how CDOT retains ownership and maintenance and the County will be fee simple owner and maintain the corridor regardless of annexation by Municipalities. Notification was sent to property owners adjacent to the proposed arterial and collector road changes Elizabeth Relford, Public Works, stated that the Functional Classification Map is a qualitative guide and added that the map does not dictate how the road is built. Through the building permit process, the setbacks are determined so that structures are not built within the right-of-way. The long range transportation planning effort for Public Works helps to develop the capital improvement program. She emphasized that they try not to update this map often as it affects peoples' lives. She added that it is merely a planning tool for the future. Ms. Relford stated that after talking with municipalities they wanted arterials surrounding their communities; however they came to an agreement of classifying them as collector roadways. Commissioner Jemiola referred to County Road 29 as a local roadway and asked what classification County Road 49 was prior to being built out. Ms. Relford said that officially there wasn't a classification map until the Transportation Plan was created in 2011; however it has always functioned as an arterial road. Mr. Jemiola asked if there are any projects to County Road 29 in the near future. Ms. Relford said that the Board wanted to get feedback on reclassifying it as well as incorporating an Access Control Plan if it is classified as an arterial roadway. Commissioner Wailes asked why make County Road 29 an arterial when it seems that County Road 31 has more traffic. Ms. Relford said that County Road 31 doesn't go north past Highway 14. Commissioner Jemiola asked if any homes will be affected with regard to the proposed right-of-way for County Road 29. Mr. Flesher replied that there are four homes that will be affected. Commissioner Sparrow noted that this Functional Classification Map is not for directing growth but rather preparing for growth. Michael Wailes left the meeting at 2:15 pm. The Chair called a recess at 2:16 pm and reconvened the hearing at 2:25 pm. The Chair asked if there was anyone in the audience who to speak for or against this proposed Ordinance. Jacquelyn Troudt, 32408 Sunshine Lane, Greeley, Colorado, stated that it doesn't seem that the traffic counts do not necessitate County Road 29 being classified as an arterial roadway. She said that County Road 31 does extend to County Road 90 and County Road 33 does extend further than County Road 90. Ms. Troudt stated that County Road 29 to the south does not connect to Greeley and that bottle neck at O Street would be tremendous. Commissioner Smock asked Ms. Troudt where she would propose an arterial road north. Ms. Troudt said that County Roads 31 and 35 are already heavily used and arterial roads coming out of Greeley so it seems that those are the natural traffic patterns. Commissioner Stille asked if a collector roadway classification for County Road 29 would be better. Ms. Troudt replied that they would be satisfied with a collector roadway classification. Kristin Debo, 32412 Sunshine Lane, said that she understands the need for improvement for getting goods and services north of Greeley. However, the amount of traffic from 0 Street to Highway 392 doesn't warrant the need for arterial status for County Road 29. She measured off the 70 feet from the center of the road that they would need to include for the proposed right-of-way and it is 30 feet from their back yard. She added that there is a school bus stop on the corner for the kids in the neighborhood and is concerned for 2 their safety. The jump from the 60 foot right-of-way to 140 foot right-of-way is huge and doesn't know when this is going to happen. She emphasized that their big concern is the area from O Street to Highway 392 on County Road 29 and classifying that as an arterial roadway. Commissioner Stille asked the audience if upgrading the local road from Highway 392 to O Street to a collector status, rather than an arterial, would be better. Eric Troudt, 32408 Sunshine Lane, replied that County Road 29 ends at O Street and has no connectivity into Greeley, which is one of the defining factors of an arterial roadway. Ben Truitt, 32406 Sunshine Lane, said that he doesn't have land at stake and lives east of County Road 29. He is concerned with the issue of O Street and added that you cross the railroad track twice from County Road 29 to County Road 31 and then going south on County Road 31 you cross it a third time. He said that the question isn't if we need an arterial road north of Greeley but if it should be on a road already heavily traveled, such as County Road 31. Stacy Haggard, 38399 CR 29, stated that she lives north of Highway 392. She is concerned with the timeline of any proposed changes. She understands that County Road 49 went in very quickly from the access control was established to construction now and it sounds like the access control plan is in process for County Road 29. She doesn't feel it is necessary to have another highway between Highway 257 and Highway 85. Ms. Relford said there are no dates identified to have the plans completed by so the access control plan is in its very early stages. Ted Maino, 38662 CR 29, said that he appreciates the planning for 25 years into the future. An arterial designation requires people and a lot of traffic and added that this corridor is primarily agricultural. He said that you need to weigh if agriculture should be protected or if housing development should occur. He added that developers will attack this corridor with building as Weld County will designate it as an arterial roadway. Heath Smith, 32410 Sunshine Lane, said that there are already three means of getting to Pierce and asked what benefit there would be in creating an arterial roadway for another access to these municipalities. He asked if the money would be well spent from taxpayer dollars if there is already three ways to get to Pierce. Mr. Smith asked how this would impact Highway 392. He added that County Road 31 is already backed up at Highway 392 in the mornings when he brings his child to school. He expressed great concern for safety of the subdivisions community with their children playing so close to the road. Ms. Naill, 32414 Sunshine Lane, stated that Weld County is growing faster than any other county in Colorado. Her biggest concern is how fast this will happen and added that it is scary to think about how fast things are going to change. Commissioner Sparrow said that County Road 29 has been compared to County Road 49 but asked them to understand that there are no roads east of County Road 49 that run north/south. Motion: Amend the classification of County Road 29 to a collector status roadway on the Functional Classification Map, Moved by Jordan Jemiola, Seconded by Joyce Smock. Vote: Motion passed (summary: Yes = 5, No = 1, Abstain = 0). Yes: Cherilyn Barringer, Gene Stille, Jordan Jemiola, Joyce Smock, Terry Cross. No: Bruce Sparrow. Absent: Michael Wailes. Motion: Forward Ordinance 2017-01 as amended to the Board of County Commissioners along with the Planning Commission's recommendation of approval, Moved by Jordan Jemiola, Seconded by Gene Stille. Vote: Motion carried by unanimous roll call vote (summary: Yes = 6). Yes: Bruce Sparrow, Cherilyn Barringer, Gene Stille, Jordan Jemiola, Joyce Smock, Terry Cross. Absent: Michael Wailes. Vote: Motion carried by unanimous roll call vote (summary: Yes = 6). Yes: Bruce Sparrow, Cherilyn Barringer, Gene Stille, Jordan Jemiola, Joyce Smock, Terry Cross. 3 Commissioner Jemiola recommended reviewing County Road 31 and 33 for potential increase in status. He suggested that County Road 31 be classified as a collector roadway and County Road 33 to an arterial roadway. Commissioner Smock encouraged the groups to look at Highway 85 for improvements to accommodate the traffic. Meeting adjourned at 3:54 pm. Respectfully submitted, Kristine Ranslem Secretary 4 MEMORANDUM To: Board of County Commissioners Date: May 3, 2017 From: Jim Flesher, Transportation Planner Elizabeth Relford, Transportation Manager Subject: Ordinance 2017-01: In the matter repealing and re-enacting, with amendments, Appendix 8-O, Functional Classification Map, of Chapter 8, Public Works, of the Weld County Code — Third Reading The attached Functional Classification Map was amended on first reading of the ordinance on March 13, 2017, to show Weld County Road (WCR) 29 as a local road between WCR 64 (O Street) and State Highway (SH) 392. During second reading, the Board of County Commissioners (BOCC) requested staff evaluate an alternative right-of-way option for WCR 29, which they could discuss during a work session scheduled between second and third reading hearings. This work session occurred on April 19, 2017, where staff presented a 100 -foot alternative arterial road right-of-way width to the BOCC. The BOCC wanted to ensure there is adequate room at the major intersections to include auxiliary lanes. As a result, the BOCC asked staff to add a note to the map indicating the minimum arterial right-of-way width required for WCR 29 would be 100 feet, except at the following intersections where it would be 140 feet: SH 392, WCR 74, SH 14, WCR 90, and WCR 100. WCR 29 ends at WCR 100 and three of the four corners of the intersection are within the Town of Nunn with the county maintaining WCR 100 west of WCR 29. Since WCR 29 between WCR 98 and 100 has been annexed it will take coordination with the Town to require 140 feet of right-of-way for WCR 29 south of WCR 100. It is anticipated the Access Control Plan for WCR 29 will address this coordinated effort. Also discussed at the work session was the Buxman Estates Subdivision located between O Street and SH 392. It was acknowledged that Buxman Estates Subdivision plat reserved an additional 30 feet of right-of-way in addition to the 60 feet of existing right-of-way per the City of Greeley referral comments. This could result in a total combined 120 feet right-of-way for WCR 29 north of O Street. For all other roads, the minimum right-of-way width is given in the table below, along with minimum spacing for accesses. Road Designation Future Right -of -Way (minimum) Distance between Accesses (minimum) Distance between Accesses and Intersections (minimum) Local 60' 150' (75' in subdivisions) 330' Collector 80' 330' 660' Arterial 140' 660' 660' As was mentioned at first reading of the ordinance, the main effect of a road's designation is the setback required for buildings. The designation on the Functional Classification Map does not change the existing right-of-way width; only the future right-of-way width. Setbacks for buildings (but not fences, pipelines, etc.) are measured from future rights -of -way so when the future right- of-way is acquired by the county, buildings will not need to be relocated. This is especially important around intersections, where turn lanes may be constructed. Attached are two example typical road cross -sections depicting 100 -foot right-of-way widths. In the interim, the majority of the length of the arterial corridor may be paved with two 12 -foot travel lanes and eight -foot shoulders, plus two -foot gravel shoulders. Drainage ditches would take up the remainder of the right-of-way. The buffer area between the road and property lines are often constrained with public utility lines, such as cable, phone, electric, and gas, and irrigation ditches in addition to stormwater drainage, which can increase the cost of construction to accommodate everything. At intersections where the right-of-way width will remain 100 feet, a left -turn lane could be constructed by reducing the area for ditches, which may require steeper slopes or piping. Steeper slopes could require guardrail. Additional piping and guardrail lead to higher construction and maintenance costs. At intersections where 140 feet of right-of-way is acquired, right -turn lanes could be installed, as well as double -left -turn lanes where warranted. However, other factors, such as topography, utilities, and irrigation ditches could lead to additional right-of-way being necessary in many areas. These factors are determined on a case -by -case basis when designing for construction and do not affect required setbacks prior to right-of-way being acquired. 100.00' ROW O O co J U CC w O J O U) W Z O N w z O O N $ 1 MO8-ja >- < J5 a a C < W M02! O co M02! M02i = D U o I No O N :,\\ M021 —ad O F- w 0 NO L.L. J O N II w J U CO O -O a Ucr LLO • O z > J a' � W J Z W U W U ≥ Z QvO Ow0 acwo, ' Z - Z F- e J 9I o&o1 w O Q. M m(44 w J w S O Cr c.) O W LL CO V NJ OCO X � W Z } D 0 0 w WELD COUNTY C O E O C a) ^L. W 1--a C a E O O J U C O N Cr) N 0 N C c 0 CO a) v N O Sheet Number PUBLIC WORKS a) a) 0 I - Z co W C oN- oN fl- N •cr't QW00M I (L) 0I— X cc M Oro}w" �aWz U' wok J W a m a D ° a H 0 ro C N- O N N_ Last Modified Date: 0 O cn a O cc rn tY U a) ca ii On ca O L !n uJ N C D C) W I - O a C, U U) M 0 N AutoCAD Version: w -o O O 100 00' ROW 60 0 o1 w o o J 0°O Cn 20 J wor < • O or J O D O o � N >- < J o Q o < or M08 z O w U) >- Z 0 O J w < F- U_ Z H Q N CC U O N I w J C O w F- 0 >z J • O > X o w SW ZOOW r t j 0 J J 7 0 O M �(-za w0?m z p a JOgf m W J wri IX I- < 0 LL WELD COUNTY ROAD 29 F - co w O WELD COUNTY Designer PUBLIC WORKS N O N Sheet Number PUBLIC WORKS a) (0 a) O H z co t W O H col- , v QWcocO O , WerN-aoco• o O) -X in O =mva'o rn cr Or°> --w WO wCL aIL m D a C >> U C to c C c c a) 45 Q eS EN O ( U0 a, Cu 0 C 0 Ct a) U N- O N co 0 10 a� CO CO J z 0 I- U w 0) 0 a' CD z H w G! 0 U) 0 W z J L a U- 0 O Z O O w C O C O cc a' O E z O) m 0 L N Q- ) C W D 0 w I- 0 cn Q 0 U Cr) 0 Cheryl Hoffman From: Sent: To: Cc: Subject: Attachments: Jim Flesher Thursday, March 23, 2017 8:24 AM Amanda Petzold; Bethany Ford; Cheryl Hoffman; Chloe Rempel; Esther Gesick; Karla Ford; Stephanie Frederick; Tisa Juanicorena Elizabeth Relford RE: ORD#2017-01, 1st Reading (Chapter 8 Public Works) Functional Classification Map 2nd Reading corrected legend.pdf Cheryl, there was a mistake on the legend on the map I sent last week. Could you please use this one instead? Sorry about that. Thanks, Jim Original Message From: Jim Flesher Sent: Tuesday, March 14, 2017 4:24 PM To: Amanda Petzold <apetzold@CO.WELD.CO.US>; Bethany Ford <bford@co.weld.co.us>; Cheryl Hoffman <choffman@CO.WELD.CO.US>; Chloe Rempel <crempel@co.weld.co.us>; Esther Gesick <egesick@co.weld.co.us>; Karla Ford <kford@co.weld.co.us>; Stephanie Frederick <sfrederick@co.weld.co.us>; Tisa Juanicorena <tjuanicorena@co.weld.co.us> Cc: Elizabeth Relford <erelford@co.weld.co.us> Subject: RE: ORD#2017-01, 1st Reading (Chapter 8 Public Works) Cheryl: Attached is the map with the change BOCC made on 1st Reading yesterday. Please let me know if you have any questions. Thanks, Jim Flesher, AICP Transportation Planner Weld County Public Works 1111 H Street PO Box 758 Greeley, CO 80632-0758 Office: (970) 400-3762 Web: www.weldgov.com 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. 1 O co cn cn C) Functiona N C) L z .C) a) w Z C.) -O< f "0� W��%f ©alE��>J 11%1)o,=o $/I$±G2 c < D G 6f ,aa2"zEt e5�<P 2`�ID��i =i� owc_:c8c a�Eua•mu_ m� oon�6@��\b��2� o_2em moo.-ec oc�z2 E5« _==p<_I §k(io��) =;aO�a/� 4 \(kko�oi§� =\.[cr2/0275 k®cbwitH,2 � S2§\2oacoa °° I�If$k EcSt/ui07/A � z j z o - ; „ og E(on 0 \ O Q) CD w<�e> -C w E e k2j2�}2\I &3 -woo k -5l_ C oc mwwz 2 f.() 0 =uee0®f- A��k� 122f(wyk-E e«z<e=,2 13 000 — E2LEbq7z6> istoo°a_ -85 22»0<-�� ,zz}w ��o,zon� z-§ryo 2ein � c co !O. wwo2 �vkw O\ 6°E z 0 0) a - sigma CZ L_ 0 C 73. Ct C) 0 C N Cheryl Hoffman From: Sent: To: Cc: Subject: Attachments: Jim Flesher Tuesday, March 14, 2017 4:24 PM Amanda Petzold; Bethany Ford; Cheryl Hoffman; Chloe Rempel; Esther Gesick; Karla Ford; Stephanie Frederick; Tisa Juanicorena E I izabeth-Relford RE: ORD#2017-01, is Reading (Chapter 8 Public Works) anion Map 2nd Reading.pdf Cheryl: Attached is the map with the change BOCC made on 1st Reading yesterday. Please let me know if you have any questions. Thanks, Jim Flesher, AICP Transportation Planner Weld County Public Works 1111 H Street PO Box 758 Greeley, CO 80632-0758 Office: (970) 400-3762 Web: www.weldgov.com &5/..z3//-7 a%tetac_4_,ia 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. 1 NVOO1 , --_a.1- I r --- I--- r1F x'11 1 1 a r----� 1 o oegInf5% CC SB MOM CB 8JDM z O 2 z C 0 C, J m'r T, .—tea �. m • • i. _ 1 6c 5 1 'r 1. i .n N. t m T 1 to 1 ,- m I I Ip I in 1 CS 80O r N i-1 • t In 1, al O, a MEMORANDUM TO: Board of County Commissioners DATE: March 13, 2017 FROM: Jim Flesher, Transportation Planner Elizabeth Relford, Transportation Manager SUBJECT: Ordinance 2017-01: In the matter repealing and re- enacting, with amendments, Appendix 8-O, Functional Classification Map, of Chapter 8, Public Works, of the Weld County Code According to Sec. 8-8-10 of the Weld County Code, the Functional Classification Map is a component of the Weld County Transportation Plan and should be updated every two years. The Functional Classification Map groups county roads into functional classes of local, collector, and arterial roads according to the character of service provided. For example, arterial roads provide greater mobility with fewer access points and intersections, whereas local roads provide more access resulting in lower mobility. In accordance with the 2035 Transportation Plan goals, the primary goal is to establish a classification system that preserves the functional integrity (safety, capacity, and mobility) of the county roadway network through coordinated right-of-way, access, and cross-section guidelines. One purpose of the Map is to identify where additional right-of-way (ROW) will need to be reserved for collectors and arterials. Weld County ROW widths are characterized as follows: Local roads: 60' of ROW Collector roads: 80' of ROW Arterial roads: 140' of ROW Another purpose of the Functional Classification Map is for measuring setbacks for structures, which are measured from the future ROW. This helps ensure fewer structures will need to be removed if and when the road is widened. Finally, the Weld County Code stipulates road impact fees on new development may only be spent on collector and arterial roads, so it is important the Functional Classification Map be kept up-to-date. The Functional Classification Map was last updated in January, 2015. The proposed changes to the map are summarized below and represented in purple on the attached map. The dashed purple lines represent proposed arterial roads and the solid purple lines represent proposed collector roads. The hatched oval represents a future alignment to be determined. The green line on the map indicates the "County Highway," which was designated as such by resolution on August 10, 2016, in accordance with House Bill 16-1155. The County Highway is better known as the WCR 49 Corridor, which extends north from 1-76 to US 34, then becomes the Weld County Parkway where it crosses the South Platte and Cache la Poudre Rivers and connects to WCR 47 at WCR 60 '/z, and extends north to State Highway 392. The purpose of this designation is to protect the County's corridor infrastructure investment similar to how the Colorado Department of Transportation (CDOT) continues to own and maintain roads regardless of annexation by municipalities. All other road designations would remain the same. The proposed changes are as follows: 1. Make WCR 29 an arterial (currently a local road) north of WCR 64 (O Street) to WCR 100. The last mile of WCR 29 has been annexed by the Town of Nunn and they request partnering on modifying the classification, which would be addressed in a future Intergovernmental Agreement. Currently, Weld County does not classify any north/south road as an arterial west of US 85 and north of State Highway 14. Therefore, since WCR 29 is approximately 17 miles of continuous road paralleling US 85 and the communities of Nunn, Pierce, Ault, Eaton, and Severance, it best meets the definition of future arterial corridor. According to Weld County's arterial classification definitions, arterial roads should be spaced two to three miles apart. Weld County is currently working with Nunn, Pierce, Ault, Eaton, and Severance to develop an access control plan to ensure the safety of this corridor. 2. The next request is to reclassify WCR 54 from a collector road to an arterial road from the city limits of Evans east to WCR 49. East of WCR 49, WCR 54 is a local gravel road to WCR 51 and portions of the ROW do not exist east of WCR 51. Weld County currently classifies the paved WCR 54 'A (sometimes also referred to as WCR 52 %2) as a collector road into the Town of Kersey. However, Kersey has requested working with the County to determine a future arterial alignment that works best for this area, since no arterial road is currently identified in this area east of WCR 49. If and when an arterial alignment is identified, the Functional Classification Map will be updated again accordingly, which means property owners adjacent to the arterial alignment will be mailed notification of a future meeting for consideration of updating the map. No timeframe has been identified for determining this alignment. Similar to the WCR 29 working group, Weld County is meeting with the cities and towns along the WCR 54 corridor from Loveland to Kersey, as well as CDOT and Larimer County, to discuss development of an access control plan. Since this road has a different name by all agencies involved (State Highway 402, Larimer County Road 18, Weld County Road 54, and 37`h Street), the group recommended naming the corridor "Freedom Parkway." 3. For the proposed collector road changes, the first request is to extend the collector road status of WCR 66 east from WCR 43 to WCR 47 (two miles). This portion of WCR 66 is currently identified as a local road, but functions as a collector road with average daily traffic volumes ranging from 500-737 vehicles per day (vpd) and connecting WCR 47 to US 85. WCR 66 between US 85 and WCR 43 is a collector road already. In addition, WCR 66 is the first east/west continuous connection north of the Greeley -Weld County Airport. (County Roads 62, 64, and 64 '/2 are bisected by the Airport.) 4. The next recommended collector road modification is to extend WCR 52's existing collector road status from US 85 east to WCR 43 northeast of LaSalle (approximately two miles). Unlike many of the municipalities, Weld County has not identified many east/west collector roads around LaSalle. This would help meet the County's spacing criteria. There are approximately 500 vpd using this portion of WCR 52. WCR 43 is a collector road. 5. The last proposed change is to extend the collector status of WCR 32 west from WCR 29 approximately % mile to the town limits of Platteville. Currently, WCR 32 is a collector road only to WCR 29, where its designation changes to a local road. It does not make sense for this short portion of road to be a local road between the Platteville town limits and the collector portion of WCR 32. Therefore, the request is to continue the collector road status up to the Platteville town limits. Notification was mailed to property owners adjacent to the proposed arterial and collector road changes. Staff recommends approval of the proposed changes to the Functional Classification Map, which is Appendix 8-O of the Weld County Code. A Functional Classification Map work session was held with the Board on January 30`h. We are available to answer any questions you may have. Cheryl Hoffman To: Cc: Subject: Excellent, Elizabeth! Thank you. Have a great weekend. Elizabeth Relford; Jim Flesher Esther Gesick RE: ORD 2017-01 - Chapter 8 Public Works Transportation Plan and Functional Classification Map Cheryl Hoffman Deputy Clerk to the Board Weld County Clerk to the Board Office 1150 O Street Greeley, CO 80631 970.400.4227 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: Elizabeth Relford Sent: Friday, March 03, 2017 9:20 AM To: Cheryl Hoffman <choffman@CO.WELD.CO.US>; Jim Flesher <jflesher@co.weld.co.us> Cc: Esther Gesick <egesick@co.weld.co.us> Subject: RE: ORD 2017-01 - Chapter 8 Public Works - Transportation Plan and Functional Classification Map Hi Cheryl, Below are my answers to your questions. Let me know if you have any follow up questions. Thanks, Elizabeth From: Janet Lundquist Sent: Friday, March 03, 2017 9:16 AM To: Cheryl Hoffman <choffman@CO.WELD.CO.US>; Jim Flesher <iflesher@co.weld.co.us>; Elizabeth Relford <erelford@co.weld.co.us> 1 Cc: Esther Gesick <egesick@co.weld.co.us> Subject: RE: ORD 2017-01- Chapter 8 Public Works - Transportation Plan and Functional Classification Map Hi Cheryl, This code change actually being done by Elizabeth and Jim. I copied them on the email so they can answer your questions. I hope you have a great weekend! Janet Lundquist Support Services Manager Weld County Public Works Dept. P.O. Box 758, Greeley, CO 80632 Tele-970.356.4000 ext 3726 Fax- 970.304.6497 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: Cheryl Hoffman Sent: Friday, March 03, 2017 8:48 AM To: Janet Lundquist <jundquist@co.weld.co.us> Cc: Esther Gesick <egesick@co.weld.co.us> Subject: ORD 2017-01 - Chapter 8 Public Works - Transportation Plan and Functional Classification Map Good morning, Janet, I've got some questions on this one and want to make sure we have everything for our 1st reading on March 13. I'm sure you're the one to help, please. 1. Does the Plan (8N) remain as is or are there changes to it? As of today, we have no changes from PC. (8N) is the transportation plan and it does not change. What changes is Appendix (8O). The actual map is being updated. You will not have the final map changes until 3rd reading. 2. Does the Final Map (attached) reflect the changes made at PC? The map does not reflect PC changes because we are not sure the BOCC is going to agree to their recommendation. I would leave the proposed map as is until 3rd reading. Thanks for your assistance with this, Janet. Just let me know. O Cheryl Hoffman Deputy Clerk to the Board Weld County Clerk to the Board Office 2 Cheryl Hoffman To: Cc: Subject: Attachments: Good morning, Janet, Janet Lundquist Esther Gesick ORD 2017-01 - Chapter 8 Public Works - Transportation Plan and Functional Classification Map Ord2017-01 Final_2017_draft_fn_class_map.pdf I've got some questions on this one and want to make sure we have everything for our 1St reading on March 13. I'm sure you're the one to help, please. 1. Does the Plan (8N) remain as is or are there changes to it? As of today, we have no changes from PC. 2. Does the Final Map (attached) reflect the changes made at PC? Thanks for your assistance with this, Janet. Just let me know. O Cheryl Hoffman Deputy Clerk to the Board Weld County Clerk to the Board Office 1150 O Street Greeley, CO 80631 970.400.4227 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. 1 Cheryl Hoffman From: Sent: To: Cc: Subject: Attachments: Cheryl, Esther Gesick Friday, February 24, 2017 5:26 PM Cheryl Hoffman Jim Flesher; Elizabeth Relford FW: Functional Classification Map Revisions BOCC Memo Functional Classification Map Revisions.pdf; Final_2017 _draft_fn_class_map.pdf Please use the attached documents when preparing the Ordinance file. Also, please note Jim's instruction below and flag the file so we are sure to swap the maps before the Final Reading gets sent to Recording. It will also need to be saved in conjunction with the Ordinance so we are sure to upload the correct version when we submit to Municode for codification. Thanks! Esther E. Gesick Clerk to the Board 1150 O Street I P.O. Box 758 1 Greeley, CO 80632 tel: (970) 400-4226 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. Original Message From: Jim Flesher Sent: Friday, February 24, 2017 4:48 PM To: Esther Gesick <egesick@co.weld.co.us> Cc: Elizabeth Relford <erelford@co.weld.co.us> Subject: Functional Classification Map Revisions Esther, here are a memo and map for this March 13 item. Once approved, we will swap out this map with a finalized one that doesn't highlight the changes or say "DRAFT", for the ordinance. Please let me know if you need anything else for this from us. Thanks, Jim Flesher, AICP Transportation Planner Weld County Public Works 1111 H Street PO Box 758 Greeley, CO 80632-0758 Office: (970) 400-3762 1 Web: www.weldgov.com 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. 2 Cheryl Hoffman From: Sent: To: Cc: Subject: Attachments: Importance: Hi Cheryl, Esther Gesick Monday, January 30, 2017 3:27 PM Cheryl Hoffman Elizabeth Relford; Kristine Ranslem; Jim Flesher; Tom Parko Jr. FW: Functional Road Classification Map - PC - legal notice, resolution Ordinance 2014-13.docx; ResOrdinance 2014-13.pdf; FINAL PW Public Hearing POSTCARD 103014.pub High Please slate out Ordinance reading/publication dates and send to the attached group for confirmation with their schedules. If everyone concurs, then go ahead and get the Docket information to Kris so she can get her notice ready and PW can do their SPO mailing. Also, since this has to go to PC on 2/21, please be sure to slate in enough time to draft the BOCC Ordinance following PC before our 1st Reading goes on the Agenda. Thanks! Esther E. Gesick Clerk to the Board 1150 O Street/P.O. Box 758IGreeley, CO 80632 tel: (970) 400-4226 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: Elizabeth Relford Sent: Monday, January 30, 2017 2:50 PM To: Esther Gesick <egesick@co.weld.co.us>; Kristine Ranslem <kranslem@co.weld.co.us> Cc: Jim Flesher <jflesher@co.weld.co.us>; Tom Parko Jr. <tparko@co.weld.co.us> Subject: FW: Functional Road Classification Map - PC - legal notice, resolution Importance: High Hi Esther, We just had a work session with the Commissioners and they support staff's recommended changes on the functional classification map update of 2017. We will put the package together to get in On -Base. I have spoken with Kris and she is ok with scheduling this before Planning Commission on February 21St, but we need your help with the Commissioners 3 reading dates so we can update the 2014 notices. I have also attached the post card mailing we did for that same update. Let us know what you're thinking. I appreciate everyone's help! Thanks, Elizabeth 1 Elizabeth Relford Transportation Manager Weld County Public Works 1111 H Street PO Box 758 Greeley, CO 80632-0758 Email: erelford@co.weld.co.us Office: (970) 304-6496 Ext 3748 Mobile: (970) 673-5836 Web: http://www.co.weld.co.us 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: Kristine Ranslem Sent: Monday, January 30, 2017 1:44 PM To: Elizabeth Relford <erelford@co.weld.co.us> Subject: Functional Road Classification Map - PC - legal notice, resolution Importance: High Thanks so much for your help with the dates! That saved me a lot of time© Attached is the legal notice that was sent for the PC/BOCC. I would just need the hearing dates for BOCC to plug in, but I would assume that the request would stay the same? If you could get those dates to me by Thursday, we could have it at the 2/21 PC hearing. Thanks again! Kr/s t ' e 1ZGlvt,S/e�u Planning Technician Weld County Planning Department 1555 N. 17th Avenue Greeley, CO 80631 (970)400-3519 kranslem@weldgov.com 2 EXHIBIT INVENTORY CONTROL SHEET ORDINANCE 2017-01 - CHAPTER 8 PUBLIC WORKS - ARTICLE VIII TRANSPORTATION PLANNING AND FUNCTIONAL CLASSIFICATION MAP Exhibit Submitted By Description A. Jessica Drake Letter of Concern (Email) Dated 02/21/2017 B. Cathy & Dennis Schulte Letter of Opposition Dated 03/09/2017 Kristen Debo & Jonathan C. Wolf Letter of Opposition Dated 04/03/2017 D. Eric & Jacquelyn Troudt Letter of Opposition Dated 04/03/2017 E. Ben & Apricot Truitt Letter of Opposition Dated 04/03/2017 F. G. H. J. K. L. M. N. O. P. Q. R. S. T. 2017-0733 ORD2017-01 Esther Gesick az,g_-. poi 7-0 / From: Sent: To: Subject: Jim Flesher Tuesday, February 21, 2017 2:25 PM Esther Gesick; Elizabeth Relford Fwd: CR 29 arterial road Esther, this one came in after Planning Commission started. No attachment. Just the email below. Same property as the earlier comment from today. Thanks, Jim Begin forwarded message: From: Jessica Drake <sjessis80@gmail.com> Date: February 21, 2017 at 12:45:42 PM MST To: iflesher@weldgov.com Subject: CR 29 arterial road Hi, I would like to submit my objection to the planning of making cr29 an arterial road. We just bought our new home about 2 months ago. This would greatly reduce our properties for all us landowners out here. We have animals, and children to think about as well. The high and fast traffic that this would bring in would make this unsafe for all our animals and children. Thank you, Jessica and Robert Drake/Connie Rhoades 38445 CR29 Eaton, co 80615 970-301-7103 1 DENNIS & CATHY SCHULTE 38251 CR 29 ` EATON, CO 80615 3/9/2017 Mr. Mike Freeman, Commissioner District 1 Weld County 1150 O Street Greeley, CO 80631 Commissioner Freeman and Weld County Commissioners, We own a home in your district on CR 29, north of CR 74 and would like to voice our opposition to the proposed road classification change of CR 29 from a "Local" to an "Arterial" classification. It's our understanding that the proposed CR 29 arterial would replace the existing CR 27/Two Rivers Parkway arterial as the strategic northern connector highway arterial route. With the expected growth of the County, we understand that key arterial highway corridors are needed and planning needs to occur to identify the alignment. It's our understanding that's exactly what did occur in 2002-06 when CR 27 was identified as the strategic northern connector route and, following public hearings, resulted in the CR 27 arterial designation that's in place today. At the time, CR 27/Two Rivers Parkway was also identified as one of seven Strategic Roadways in the Strategic Roadway Plan, which we understand has been incorporated into the County Functional Classification Map. It appears that the realignment of the strategic northern highway arterial is a County cost savings measure - CR 29 is in place while 27 requires building about 4 miles of road. We believe it's important to note that these same conditions existed when 27 was originally designated as the preferred northern route, possibly because the missing road meant significantly fewer homeowners would be negatively affected by a potential 4 -lane highway — there are currently 27 homes on CR 27 and 59 homes on CR 29. So, the potential County savings comes at a huge cost to the CR 29 homeowners in substantially decreased property values, inability to sell homes and decreased quality of life by potentially being adjacent to a 4 -lane highway, etc. It's been suggested that even with the proposed new arterial classification, CR 29 will likely remain just as it is - a 2 -lane paved road that's never widened into a 4 -lane highway. If this is true, we would suggest that there's no need to change CR 29 to an arterial classification, which has the 140' ROW required for 4 -lane highways. Because we believe there will be a future need for 4 -lane northern arterial, we ask that the Commissioners honor the previous public hearings and planning that designated CR 27 as the strategic northern connector arterial. For the past 11 years, this designation has allowed residents to know where the potential highway was going to avoid locating a home, their most important investment, on a future highway. After all these years, changing this established arterial is unfair and costly to the current home owners on CR 29. As the strategic northern connector arterial, CR 27 could also serve as the emergency access route identified as one of the reasons for the CR 29 arterial classification request. With the construction of the missing 4 miles, CR 27 parallels Hwy 85 from O Street north to CR 120. CR 29 parallels Hwy 85 only to CR 100 where it adjoins Hwy 85. Long-term, we assume there will be just as much need for an emergency parallel route north of CR 100 as there is south. A built -out CR 27 could provide a longer parallel and therefore potentially a better long-term emergency route. Finally, we ask that the Commissioners deny the CR 29 arterial classification request and reaffirm CR 27 as the strategic northern connector arterial. Thank you for your consideration. (/Z,4,Cathnnis Schulte Cc: Elizabeth Relford, Weld County Department of Public Works CIS Hoffman From: Sent: To: Cc: Subject: Attachments: Esther Gesick Wednesday, March 29, 2017 3:34 PM Cheryl Hoffman kristen.debo@gmail.com FW: Letter in opposition to Ordinance #2017-1 April 3 BOCC letter.pdf Cheryl, Please include the attachment as an Exhibit for the Ordinance. Thank you, Esther E. Gesick Clerk to the Board 1150 O Street/P.O. Box 758IGreeley, CO 80632 tel: (970) 400-4226 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: Kristen Debo [mailto:kristen.debo@gmail.com] Sent: Wednesday, March 29, 2017 3:05 PM To: Esther Gesick <egesick@co.weld.co.us> Subject: Letter in opposition to Ordinance #2017-1 Good afternoon, Esther. Attached is a letter from me and my husband in opposition to the proposed changes to the Functional Classification Map. Can you please pass it on the the BOCC for the meeting on Monday, April 3? Thank you for your time. Kristen Debo 1 April 3, 2017 To: Weld County Board of County Commissioners From: Kristen Debo and Jonathan Wolf Re: Opposition to Code Ordinance #2017-01- Weld County Transportation Plan and Functional Classification Map We write this letter both out of gratitude to the BOCC and as a further request to reconsider the reclassification of WCR 29 north of SH 392. We greatly appreciate the consideration to leave WCR 29 from O Street to SH 392 as a local road, however, we believe changing the designation of WCR 29 north of SH 392 to an arterial road is a waste of taxpayers' money for a plan that wasn't thoroughly thought through. While County staff stated that WCR 29 "best met the definition of a continuous roadway", if WCR 31 were to be properly evaluated, it would also meet this definition given the continuity south into Greeley and beyond. Per the City of Greeley's 2035 Transportation Vision Plan, Greeley is planning improvements on 59th Avenue (WCR 31) from 4th Street to O Street. 59th Avenue (WCR 31) at O Street to SH 392 per the Weld County Functional Classification Map is already deemed an arterial road. We understand improvements to the road need to be made to improve safety at some intersections, but jumping two classification levels seems a bit overzealous. We also understand that where there are roads, vehicles will travel. However, the most traffic volume is not on WCR 29, but on WCR 35, and WCR 31- which is already being used as an arterial roadway because of its connectivity from Greeley proper north. When asked by residents, County staff stated that they did not know why WCR 31 wasn't looked at as a possible arterial roadway. In conclusion, we ask that the BOCC reevaluate the proposed Functional Classification Map to consider reclassifying WCR 31 (or WCR 35) to an arterial road and leaving WCR 29 from O Street to WCR 100 as a local road. Again, we thank you for the consideration to leave WCR 29 from O Street to SH 392 as a local road and hope you take the time to consider leaving the current classification of local road to the entire roadway. Sincerely, Kristen Debo 32412 Sunshine Lane Greeley, CO 80631 Jonathan Wolf 32412 Sunshine Lane Greeley, CO 80631 ,'4 r IL April 3, 2017 Weld County Board of Commissioners Re: Opposition to the proposed 2017 functional classification map, as part of the 2035 Weld County Transportation Plan. tit a, We write this letter both out of appreciation to the Commissioners, and as a further request to reconsider the classification of WCR 29 north of SH 392. 4 Leaving the current classification of WCR 29 between O Street and SH 392 as a local road is greatly appreciated. However; we feel that having WCR 29 north of SH 392 designated as an arterial road will be a massive misuse of Weld County taxpayer funds to develop a poorly vetted plan. I` j 1_ Our main concerns of this designation are as follows: A as c • Traffic Counts. Based upon the information we have received both from the Planning Commission meeting on February 21, 2017 and the Board of County Commissioners meeting on March 13, 2017, a major consideration for this roadway being reclassified as an arterial road is to plan for roadway expansion to accommodate the traffic traveling between Nunn and Greeley. As previously discussed, this roadway is not a direct connection into the largest community in northern Weld County, Greeley. We suggest that WCR 29 south from Nunn be designated as a collector or arterial road to WCR 90 or SH 14. Traffic could easily travel east on WCR 90 or SH 14 to WCR 31, and continue directly into Greeley. WCR 31 is a heavily traveled area, as indicated by daily traffic patterns, and traffic counts included in the 2035 Weld County Transportation Plan. As shown in the table below, WCR 31 is listed as the 9Th highest traveled county road in Weld County. JJwJ 3 (2 I WELD COUNTY 2035 T&4XSPORTATRW PLATY Table 4: Higbest Traveled Couch Roadt CR 74' CR 35' CR 49' Two Rivers Pkwy CR 1' Turner Blvd. CR 62 CR 19 CR 31 CR 17' CR 53' CR 60.5' Two Rivers Pkwy CR 74 CR 378 CR54 CR 13 CR 49 .CRili:' n 9,919 7,463 6,430 5,772 5,742 4,952 4,929 4,622 4,460 4,027 3,780 3,693 3,669 3,548 3,521 3,519 3,278 3,193 3,048 CR 15 F St CR 30 CR 396 CR 28 Dead End CR 13 CR 70 CR 64 CR 50 SH 34 CR 49 W 4th St CR 31 Two Rivers Pkwy CR 13 CR 26 CR 18 CR 60.5 CR 21 CR 66 US 34 CR 378 CR 34 SH 119 CR 17 CR 74 SH 392 US 34 CR 60.5 CR 55 CR 64.5 CR 35 65th Ave Hwy 257 Hwy 66 CR 22 SH 392 V f r 1 Traffic volume on WCR 29 is not currently present. There is no traffic count data included in the 2035 Weld County Transportation Plan for WCR 29, and the current traffic pattern does not support this roadway being reclassified to an arterial roadway. While County staff stated that WCR 29 "best met the definition of a continuous roadway", if WCR 31 were to be properly evaluated, it would also meet this definition given the continuity south into Greeley and beyond. Per the City of Greeley's 2035 Transportation Vision Plan, Greeley is planning improvements on 59th Avenue (WCR 31) from 4th Street to 0 Street (see map below). 59th Avenue (WCR 31) at 0 Street to SH 392 per the Weld County Functional Classification Map is already deemed an arterial road. GREELEY a - t,....,..wat«. Legend Chapter 2: Existing Transportation Conditions Figure 2-1; Exist/jig Roadway Network howdy f.pee nn 1.e.' wilea sonHu. Mop Arend a..a n Cry l...t. < - ► vsabw ul Lars I1-> .:fie The fact that WCR 31 is not being proposed as an arterial road, is a vast oversight of County planning. Safety. As many of the Commissioners expressed, we share the Board's concern for safety in this area. We drive this system of roadways everyday alongside you, and if the Board determines that an arterial designation is necessary, the proper safety measures need to be incorporated into the planning. WCR 29 south of 0 street floods in times of high water, and as such this roadway does not plan for safe travel in times of natural disaster. The geographical landscape of 71st Avenue at the Poudre River is much more conducive to roadway flooding than the roadway of 59th Avenue. WCR 31 currently has major safety concerns as this road is designed as a local roadway but is being used as a major artery in and out of Greeley to the north. This roadway is properly classified as an arterial road from Greeley to SH 392; but a local road between SH 392 and WCR 90. This is an opportunity to maintain continuity as well as the connectivity to communities north and south of Greeley. In conclusion, the traffic counts on WCR 29 do not warrant an estimated $100 million project. It was stated that the estimated cost to pave WCR 100 south to SH 14 is $35 million. Additional traffic r, . counts and planning should be done to determine the best roadway for the County to make such a Or costly investment. We suggest the Board reconsider approving the Functional Classification map, _ until updated daily vehicle traffic counts are obtained on both WCR 31 and WCR 29. We strongly believe that this difference in vehicle counts will identify the proper arterial roadway. L $ i S We appreciate the consideration and opportunity to bring this issue for discussion before the Board of Weld County Commissioners. Sincerely, I J Eric Troudt ;32408 Sunshine Lane Greeley, CO 80631 y 5 4 es 91 Jacquelyn Troudt, CPA 32408 Sunshine Lane Greeley, CO 80631 April 3, 2017 Weld County Board of Commissioners Re: Opposition to the proposed 2017 functional classification map, as part of the 2035 Weld County Transportation Plan. We write this letter asking that the board keeps Weld County Road 29 local. We are sure that the board has seen the data of vehicle count and heard of the safety concerns, but there is a concern of financial stewardship. If CR 29's classification changes, then (at least our understanding) is that funds will be allocated to the improvement of CR 29. There is no reason to even allocate money let alone spend it on a road that clearly does not represent the best road to connect northern Weld County to Greeley. Here is a simple comparison that we would like the board to look at: CR 29 • Starts at CR 100 and ends at O Street, approximately 17 miles • Majority is unpaved with no major traffic signals • Minimal traffic CR 31 • Starts at CR 90 and converges into CR 378, approximately 22 miles • Majority is paved with several major traffic signals • Heavy traffic By simply looking at comparing these two roads, it is clear to see that CR 29 should stay local and CR 31 should become a collector or arterial road. The only thing that CR 29 has over CR 31 is that it continues north into Nunn. If the concern is to connect the fine folks of Nunn, then minimize the cost by only focusing on CR 29 from CR 90 or even Hwy 14 north. Regardless where it happens, CR 29 will have to shift over to CR 31 because CR 29 does not continue south passed O street. Please be good stewards of our money and keep CR 29 a local road. Let CR 31 become the focus, since it is already being used as a major connecting road. We appreciate the consideration and opportunity to bring this issue for discussion before the Board of Weld County Commissioners. Sincerely, Ben Truitt 32406 Sunshine Lane Greeley, CO 80631 Apricot Truitt, Ph. D. 32406 Sunshine Lane Greeley, CO 80631 Hello