At a joint work session of the Archuleta County Board of County Commissioners (BoCC) and the Pagosa Lakes Property Owners Association (PLPOA) Board of Directors, the boards discussed and heard public comments on road issues in various areas of the PLPOA.
The discussion opened with PLPOA board president Dan Mayer explaining that the county had planned in 2023 to pave roads in the Vista and Trails subdivisions prior to budget overruns caused by improperly authorized change orders on road projects depleting the county budget and halting the work.
Mayer asked if the county had an update on what work might be done in 2024 on paving in those areas.
Derek Woodman, then the county manager, explained that the paving in Trails and Vista was planned to use a cold asphalt product that the county did apply in a portion of Lakewood Village.
He commented that the product “fails miserably,” “was not the product we were sold” and that the county would not be moving forward with doing any work involving this product.
He stated that all roads in Vista that have a hard surface are composed of chip seal and that the county intends to bring in a contractor to do repair work on these roads in 2024.
Woodman stated that, to prepare for this, the county is making efforts to address the drainage problems in the area, including replacing culverts.
However, he explained that many of these culverts are not county owned but are privately owned driveway culverts, meaning that the county has to work with property owners to get them to repair or replace them.
Following drainage repairs, Woodman stated that the county would add material to the gravel roads and improve their crowns prior to the application of magnesium chloride for dust mitigation.
He added that another issue in the area is that many area residents park their vehicles on the road — vehicles which will have to be moved off the road to allow work to be completed.
Woodman explained that, in Chris Mountain Village II and portions of Trails, the county obtained a $1.9 million grant for infrastructure improvements from the Colorado Department of Local Affairs (DOLA) and will be working to hire a contractor to complete the grant-funded road improvements in the area.
He stated that this work should take place this year and that the roads brought up to county standards through this work will then receive similar treatment to other roads in the area.
“So, Vista’s not going to be asphalted?” PLPOA board member Wade Lundy asked.
Woodman replied that it would not be and that the plan had not been to apply asphalt in Vista since the cold asphalt product that the county had intended to use is not the same as hot asphalt and is significantly less expensive.
Lundy, Woodman and Commissioner Ronnie Maez then discussed county maintenance of roads in Trails and Chris Mountain Village II, with Woodman clarifying that no roads in those areas will receive new asphalt product and that the county will begin maintaining the unimproved roads that would be brought up to standards with the DOLA grant in addition to continuing to maintain the roads that are at county standards in the area.
Additionally, at the request of Mayer, Woodman explained that the chip-and-seal process involves several layers of petroleum product being applied as a binder onto the road base.
He added that, while this binder is wet, additional material is added to create a hard crust on the road.
Woodman commented that the county created many chip-and-seal roads in 1970s, but that the county did a “horrible job” of maintaining them, causing them to deteriorate and requiring current county leaders to “reinvest” into these roads to recreate similar road surfaces to what the roads originally had.
He stated that many of the roads in Chris Mountain Village II and Trails have never had a hard surface and will remain gravel roads “with maintenance.”
Woodman explained that the county plans to have the road improvements in Chris Mountain Village II and Trails completed by winter, but that “it’s a lot of work.”
He added that there are “hundreds of miles of county roads that have not received the maintenance that they should have, so [all] we can do is move forward from here.”
Maez pointed out that the county previously replaced some driveway culverts in repair work on County Road (CR) 500, and Woodman stated that he was not aware of this and would have to investigate it further.
PLPOA General Manager Allen Roth commented that repairing the drainage in Vista would be critical as the current roads deteriorate rapidly after repair due to poor drainage.
He added that the DOLA grant funds would likely be focused more on Chris Mountain Village II than Trails due to most of the roads slated for improvement being in the former subdivision.
“I think just a thing to keep in mind is these roads didn’t just fail last year or the year before that,” Commissioner Warren Brown said, adding that the roads have been “garbage for years” and poorly maintained.
He commented that current county staff are “trying to pull our proverbial pants back up in our road conditions and maintenance because it’s horrific.”
Brown commented that he was hopeful the cold asphalt product would allow the county to put hard surfaces on more roads, but that he felt it was unhelpful due to costing more than gravel and failing in a year or six months.
Commissioner Veronica Medina seconded Brown’s comments about the road conditions not just having deteriorated recently, and noted the previous lack of maintenance on county roads and the efforts the county is currently making to improve these conditions.
“So, just know we, the three of us, realize what the issues are, and we are doing our best and we’ve got staff that are looking at what roads need to be done, what the base is on every road,” she said. “Public Works has really dug in and looked at all of the roads and has a good understanding of where they sit as far as base and what needs to be done.”
Maez asked how many of the meeting attendees were in the area when Vista was first developed, adding that he was in here in the 1970s when the subdivision was developed and, at that point, many of the roads that were developed were “substandard.”
He added that one of the county’s problems is having to bring these poorly constructed roads up to standards, which is “extremely expensive.”
Lundy then asked what the role of homeowners in culvert replacements would be, particularly since “the county owns past the culvert, don’t they?”
Woodman explained that, according to current county standards, the homeowner must obtain a permit to put in a driveway, which requires the implementation of a culvert.
Lundy asked why, since the county right of way extends past the driveway culverts, it would be the homeowner’s responsibility to replace the culverts.
Maez stated that if a landowner filed to put in a culvert as part of a putting in a driveway, it is the homeowner’s responsibility to maintain it.
Following a discussion, Mayer asked Woodman how the county’s efforts to get homeowners to fix the culverts intersects with the county’s efforts to repair the roads.
Woodman explained that the county would first focus on working with property owners to have fully collapsed culverts replaced prior to shifting toward efforts to clear clogged culverts.
Mayer asked what would happen if a property owner refused to repair or clear their culvert.
“That’s going to be a hurdle that we’re going to have to face,” Woodman said, noting that such repairs can be costly.
He added that the county will attempt to borrow a vacuum trailer from the Town of Pagosa Springs for work this year and to acquire another next year to assist property owners, but he commented that the “bottom line” is that the maintenance rests with the property owner.
Maez commented that replacing culverts reduces the amount of road repairs the county can perform due to the cost of such replacements.
The group then discussed if culverts interfere with proper crowning for the roads, with Woodman explaining that the county would have to bring in additional material to build up the crowns of the roads and place them above the culverts.
Mayer expressed appreciation for the thought that Woodman had put into the road maintenance work, commenting that it seemed it would be a “big improvement” and a “big step forward.”
The board then heard public comments on the roads, with the first comment focusing on what steps the county would take to “rectify” the issues with the material placed on the roads in Lakewood Village.
Another commenter noted that some of residential property taxes go into maintenance of county roads, but that street they live on in Vista has not been maintained in the 43 years they have lived in the location.
Maez spoke on the county property taxes, noting that only about 20 percent of property taxes go to the county and that 4.5 mills, or 4.5/1000ths of every dollar of a property’s value, goes to the county’s Road and Bridge Department.
He stated that, for a house valued at $250,000, $45 goes to Road and Bridge out of the property taxes.
“If you really look at it realistically, what we’re contributing to our roads really isn’t enough,” Maez said, adding that, given his view as commissioner, he would generally support a property tax increase for roads despite normally opposing any tax increases.
A commenter asked if PLPOA pays anything toward road maintenance, which Mayer clarified it does not.
Another commenter suggested that the county should take accountability for damage that county plow drivers cause to culverts if it expects homeowners to be accountable for repair of culverts.
Following another comment about the negative impact of the new road surfaces in the Lakewood Village area that questioned what the county would do to repair the failing material, Brown asked Woodman if the county’s contract with the company that did work in Lakewood Village would allow the county to hold it accountable for defective material.
Woodman explained that the owners of the company will evaluate the roads this summer and provide a “prognosis for repair.”
Medina asked how long a repair process might take.
Woodman responded that he was unsure, but he hoped that the repairs would be done this summer.
Maez commented that the quality of the roads was low even when they were freshly completed and that the county would hold the company accountable.
Several commenters replied that they were pleased that the county had a plan to address the issue.
In response to a question from a commenter, Woodman stated that chip-and-seal roadways can last “indefinitely” assuming proper maintenance, but that the county regularly failed to perform proper maintenance in the past.
Medina also highlighted that the county recently invested in a hot box trailer to allow for more permanent patches for potholes.
The commenter pressed Medina on why such a trailer had not been purchased before since the county was aware that cold patching was ineffective, to which Medina responded, “I think really the important part is what we’re doing now forward and what we have been doing. We are focused on getting things done, getting them fixed, and maintaining what has been brought up.”
Another comment focused on more issues with the county pothole-patching process, while another asked about what would happen to roads in the Vista area and why a portion of Port Avenue was paved but another was not.
Woodman explained that material would be added to current gravel roads in Vista and they will remain gravel, while Maez added that the county made an offer to have PLPOA contribute to paving Port Avenue but they declined, so the county was only able to pay for paving a portion of it.
Another commenter expressed concerns about road conditions on Canyon Circle, stating that recent work on the road left large rocks in the roadway and questioning if the county would remove the range of materials and concrete that currently form the surface of a different portion of the roadway.
Woodman explained that this material will be removed and replaced with a hard chip-and-seal surface.
Maez added that the large rocks in the road are likely partially connected to the condition of the road base and the chip-and-seal process.
In response to another question about Canyon Circle, Maez explained that the variety of materials on the roads would be removed or milled prior to the installation of chip and seal.
A commenter in the Vista area noted that the county has generally improved the roads and commented that PLPOA should contribute to maintaining the roads.
Woodman then gave an update on county road projects in the PLPOA area, including repaving of the portion of North Pagosa Boulevard between U.S. 160 and Bastille Drive, resurfacing work on 4 miles of North Pagosa Boulevard on the way to Lake Hatcher, and resurfacing on a variety of other roadways in the area.
The group then heard a comment alleging that the county does not provide proper maintenance to roads in the Vista subdivision and questioning why less maintenance has occurred in this area than on places like Piedra Road or North Pagosa Boulevard.
Woodman stated that county application of magnesium chloride and paving work are guided by daily traffic volumes, with the county attempting to apply dust mitigation to less-traveled roads over time.
Medina commented that the current BoCC does not see the Vista subdivision as “unworthy” of repairs or road maintenance.
She stated that the county is working on completing repairs of the asphalt product laid down in the Lakewood Village area.
“We have not forgotten about you,” she said. “It’s been our priority. We have directed staff on finding a better way to do things, plan it out. Things are being bid on, so we are ready to hit the ground running … when the weather permits. So, that is really the message that I want you all to leave with, and know that we do care, we are working hard, we have heard. Just like all of you drive those roads, we too drive those roads, so we too look like drunk drivers in the road because all of us have seen those potholes. And we can only do what we can do, but we are trying our very best.”
josh@pagosasun.com
