[{"_1":2,"_99":-5,"_100":-5},"loaderData",{"_3":4,"_26":27},"root",{"_5":6,"_17":10,"_18":19,"_20":21,"_22":10,"_23":-5,"_24":-5,"_25":10},"user",{"_7":8,"_9":10,"_11":10,"_12":-5,"_13":-5,"_14":15,"_16":-5},"roles",[],"isAuthenticated",false,"isPremium","planName","subscriptionStatus","featureFlags",{},"insightsBudget","isDevelopmentHost","userPreferences",{},"recaptchaSiteKey","6LcvOJcUAAAAAHsB-gPGfGktcRlKpH7OTIU_dMTD","isImpersonating","impersonation","affiliateStatus","isFreedomPortal","routes/v2/article/layout",{"_28":29,"_30":31},"notFound",true,"relatedArticles",[32,75,87],{"_33":34,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":40,"_41":42,"_43":44,"_45":46,"_47":48,"_49":50,"_51":52,"_53":54,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":60,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":66,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":68,"_72":73,"_74":73},"mediaId",6617885,"mediaKeyId","2838727-d84a0982f38cc1b9671e1c6673095524","parentId",2838727,"title","Pitkin County hears 30% design for solid waste center expansion; board asked for cost estimates and return in fall","audioSeconds",2833,"startMs",4985000,"endMs",7818000,"viewUrl","/Search/View?dp=1&key=2838727-d84a0982f38cc1b9671e1c6673095524&start=4985&end=7818","thumbnailUrl","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/2838727-d84a0982f38cc1b9671e1c6673095524/thumbnail_4985000.jpg","articleUrl","/articles/6617885/Pitkin-County/Colorado/Pitkin-County-hears-30-design-for-solid-waste-center-expansion-board-asked-for-cost-estimates-and-return-in-fall","mediaUrl","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6617885-0f53d12db5e92d54a76da1b4263e682c/orig.mp4?Expires=1771008479&Signature=K2r9blWq5ZLnoy-qM5Ck0p7Lx6VG5kg5bZaG0uGi4xoWA48wHmUacT8fVAaFleXzWnoZg4zpzrjseADtXurAzluw4eLqzsgsxqpdJRww9cJRYTvZvkYkjQnZmXoPQfQAgu16vjGmucmRLGZRQE7541jqU0h0YecA4q4jAALYnFAyGoSqCdQ8GQq2us~6l1fwoobsuDf7Lc5YMW7h1SOvQGgFBTxRdVopPMQo4WpqImqfEcuPFeOGnLwI1-Y88Ro2mXBfERoJ6mBh~kJwVAy-SMfW7i8LoLpqVLNVhRMOIWrCy8TwcBDVA0rnj9JWCp7AwhToLz3w4UV-O~IgoOvyoA__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","author","Pitkin County","date","2025-04-01T22:30:42.62Z","article","Pitkin County public works staff and consultants presented 30% design documents on April 1 for a generational expansion and modernization of the county landfill and entrance facilities, saying the work would extend the site’s operational life and improve operations, environmental protections and public access.

Public Works Director Brian Pettit told the Board the project follows a November ballot measure that passed with roughly 84% approval and provides funding to relocate the existing scale house and entrance infrastructure to allow contiguous landfill expansions. Jake Midkiff of Weaver Consultants and Matt Rohr of HDR walked the board through the site plan at the 30% engineering level, detailing the layout of a new scale house, a larger “Motherlode Mercantile” resale/sales facility, a recycling campus with a compactor and hopper area, and a covered household hazardous‑waste (HHW) building with secure internal processing areas.

Key technical points presented to the board:
- The 2021 engineered liner to the landfill’s north provided about seven additional years of life; the proposed south expansion (planned for 2027) is estimated to add roughly 25 years; a later overlining of the top could add another ~45 years, for a combined multi‑decade extension.
- The county’s total landfill acreage was described in presentation materials at about 235 acres; the expansion plan aims for contiguous cell construction to maximize airspace and minimize cost.
- The new public‑facing structures are sized at a planning level: scale house (3,000–4,000 sq ft), Motherlode Mercantile (about 6,000–8,000 sq ft sales floor plus outdoor fenced retail yard), HHW building (about 8,000–10,000 sq ft) and a roughly 8,000‑sq‑ft recycling campus. The team said the recycling facility design includes provisions for future compactor equipment to improve hauling economy.
- Site features include an 8‑foot “Z‑wall” to provide safer, ergonomic drop‑off for residents; planned attention to ADA, solar panels, EV charging, and dark‑sky–compatible lighting; and design choices to minimize fugitive dust through increased paved areas.

Commissioners asked detailed operational and traffic questions, including whether dual scales (separate residential and commercial lanes) would speed throughput, how residential recycling drop‑off would work, concerns about turning radii and parking geometry for large haulers, and the slope/grade on the entrance and egress roads. Consultants said the design keeps grades at or below existing on‑site grades, but acknowledged a constrained site and flagged a need to adjust medians and parking dimensions to better accommodate large trucks and trailers.

Board direction and next steps: the design team will incorporate the board’s comments (particularly on circulation, medians, parking layout and safety), refine turning radii and parking layouts and return to the board in the fall with a completed set of plans and updated cost estimates. Staff and consultants noted the project remains on a multi‑year schedule tied to the landfill phase plan and bond/budget timing for construction.

Ending: Commissioners did not take formal action during the work session. Staff said refined documents and cost estimates will be prepared for a fall presentation once 60–100% design milestones and cost modeling are complete.","mediaType","Video","parentTitle","BOCC Work Session (1st and 3rd Tuesdays) - 04/01/2025","oneSentenceSummary","Pitkin County public works staff and consultants presented 30% engineering design documents for a major landfill and entrance‑facility expansion on April 1, describing a plan to relocate the scale house, add a larger resale/mercantile building, a recycling campus and a modern household hazardous‑waste facility.","taxTitle","Pitkin County, Colorado","taxId",27807,"location","headline","","shortSummary",{"_33":76,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":77,"_41":78,"_43":79,"_45":80,"_47":81,"_49":82,"_51":83,"_53":84,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":85,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":86,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":68,"_72":73,"_74":73},6617880,"Habitat asks Pitkin County for up to $1M to support modular housing factory in Rifle; commissioners seek more detail and partners",3926,8222000,12148000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=2838727-d84a0982f38cc1b9671e1c6673095524&start=8222&end=12148","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/2838727-d84a0982f38cc1b9671e1c6673095524/thumbnail_8222000.jpg","/articles/6617880/Pitkin-County/Colorado/Habitat-asks-Pitkin-County-for-up-to-1M-to-support-modular-housing-factory-in-Rifle-commissioners-seek-more-detail-and-partners","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6617880-406f53dd15290f9d4c8d72711961f26e/orig.mp4?Expires=1771008479&Signature=gmbIIl2dU5TQMfh5iXcKLOeMZsQuAR3mqEe977-FNjHurmhiqCPiDaYHrIRi59ioDswwP5LpD6A6lVYBS6EJnFGxGdNHHWM~rPMCVliMm4l10wjwuAUXZe8u9fJYd9~WbfaTswzocN4rGJKjVXDLpsyi9DqZ2gLVsFYfoMDPnAIjQpzqucbrMR9QwFWxE4NOL52tMNgq-7gAtQ0kexOJyLhUji8BnoRhEVflJKCb3Q-kXoASmZB2ktcfdd-otahPBWxeRxPF3PNnEM1VRHyZR6lhAgZ7NCWNdJsxGqxBsZMOJ5E7GYTEi5OMAAfS4YxKY1rm0hpM2grDdxBHcW~GfQ__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","Habitat for Humanity presenters asked Pitkin County commissioners on April 1 to consider a contribution of up to $1 million from the county’s general‑fund housing allocation to support construction of a 66,000‑square‑foot modular housing production facility in Rifle.

Ashley Park, Pitkin County’s housing and resiliency manager, introduced Gail (Habitat), who described a plan to operate an energy‑efficient modular factory that Habitat says will produce net‑ready modular housing units for use by deed‑restricted and other community projects across the region. Gail said the facility is planned on a donated 10‑acre parcel at the Rifle Energy Innovation Center, would initially produce about 200 units per year once at scale and create local manufacturing jobs and training (Habitat said the facility will train roughly 100 students a year in construction trades).

Key numbers and funding structure presented by Habitat and staff:
- Habitat said factory buildout and equipment will be financed with a municipal bond package totaling about $25 million and that the project team expects to close bond financing shortly. About $18 million of that cost is building and equipment; the remainder is working capital and project costs.
- Habitat’s pro forma estimates a target delivered modular cost to projects in roughly the low hundreds per square foot (presented figures included a target floor‑panelized cost estimate—Habitat cited a ~$160/sq ft production cost as their internal benchmark); developers’ on‑site and finish costs would be additional.
- Pitkin County staff advised that the county’s available general‑fund housing set‑aside (formerly a $5M line, now shown as $4.5M after prior commitments) would be the only currently eligible local funding source for this request; the county’s housing impact fee and the newly established affordable‑housing property tax revenue were not eligible for the factory request under current rules.

Commissioner questions and board concerns focused on three themes: regional coordination, risk and cost escalation, and alignment with county priorities. Commissioners asked whether nearby jurisdictions or regional partners would contribute; Gail said Pitkin County would not be the only partner in Habitat’s outreach but at the time of the meeting Pitkin County had not yet secured commitments from other counties. Commissioners asked what happens to Pitkin County’s contribution if bond costs rise or the pro forma changes; Habitat said it has contingencies and had run the pro forma by underwriters and consultants but acknowledged some risk from market shifts and changes in municipal bond tax treatment.

Board direction and next steps: commissioners asked staff to prepare a draft grant resolution for a first reading that would memorialize the parameters of any county contribution and to return with additional information before a final decision. The additional material requested included evidence of other regional partners’ financial commitments or letters of intent, a clear accounting of how Pitkin County projects (including the Phillips property) could use modular units, and updated sensitivity analysis showing how higher bond or equipment costs would affect the pro forma. Several commissioners also signaled they would prefer the county’s contribution be staged or conditioned on milestones, and asked Habitat to pursue additional commitments from other jurisdictions and institutional partners.

Ending: No funding decision was made on April 1. The board directed staff to prepare a draft grant agreement and asked Habitat to return with the requested clarifications and partner commitments for further consideration at a later meeting.","Habitat for Humanity representatives asked Pitkin County commissioners on April 1 to consider up to $1 million from a county housing set‑aside to support a new modular home production factory in Rifle, saying the 66,000‑square‑foot facility would produce net‑ready units and provide job training in the valley.",{"_33":88,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":89,"_41":90,"_43":91,"_45":92,"_47":93,"_49":94,"_51":95,"_53":96,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":97,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":98,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":68,"_72":73,"_74":73},6617890,"Pitkin County commissioners revise working agreement, emphasize accountability and brevity",3699,1278000,4977000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=2838727-d84a0982f38cc1b9671e1c6673095524&start=1278&end=4977","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/2838727-d84a0982f38cc1b9671e1c6673095524/thumbnail_1278000.jpg","/articles/6617890/Pitkin-County/Colorado/Pitkin-County-commissioners-revise-working-agreement-emphasize-accountability-and-brevity","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6617890-7e7a6e12f604cdf069ee94d9bae67986/orig.mp4?Expires=1771008479&Signature=fvn8tXbheSJuOkOFvfn7O3IVxjluDja0k5q~9qpqMbjo-iqIPvTG6h4VfzxAVSQKqzsqMCD2dGp~Gu4NZYDSUBp9K3VQuv9eYMA6hfWaA5I8Z5W0ac7dJpU6v-3yyxX108X19FKzKJCtIFWd4vTxNQefH98Lb6keSKNKmJio3Gx96DJKqCi91bc~Vb5O70QBjjccXdyT~JhBz6gpqBZBQ96FOue1tWPtjpej9saJXwGHod2fYi8ZlqmivNEe2hYmE0fRfbiVYw9CKxIHRRMHvpdbLSN12p4~xvVRzelmqZy4iBf~NiXTOdbwZSJjCy~bRpiYJu8VjXByq2hDg4jkpA__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","Pitkin County commissioners spent a large portion of their April 1 work session revising a draft “working agreement” that lays out how commissioners will interact, make decisions, and hold one another accountable. The discussion, led by Deputy County Manager Kara Silvernago, centered on tightening language, trimming redundancy, and adopting a practicable accountability process the board can use during meetings and between members.

The board reviewed edits to a document they began at a February retreat, with Silvernago describing the draft as a set of commitments commissioners are willing to make to one another. Commissioner Kelly and others proposed edits to simplify wording, reduce repetitive phrases about seeking clarification, and remove language that sounded punitive. Commissioners debated phrasing for items such as checking in with members who have not spoken, “seeking clarification if necessary,” and how to balance giving novel ideas time to breathe against avoiding groupthink.

Why it matters: the working agreement is intended to be a short, practical reference the board can use during difficult or contentious discussions. Board members said a concise, clearly worded document would be more useful in the moment than a long manifesto, and several suggested laminated one‑page copies for the dais so members can quickly reference it.

Most of the session was spent refining specific bullets on communication, preparedness and participation, constructive decision‑making, and addressing conflict. Commissioners agreed to remove or tighten language perceived as redundant (for example, removing an explicit admonition to avoid “taking offense” before seeking clarification). They added language committing to “considering bold and unique ideas” and to “maintain respectful and constructive discussions even in disagreement,” while flagging “minimizing snarkiness” only as part of that respectful‑discussion standard.

On accountability — the most debated section — commissioners discussed what “holding each other accountable” should practically mean. Staff and several commissioners recommended a laddered approach: first, a one‑on‑one conversation between members when a concern arises; if that does not resolve the issue, referral to the board chair or county manager to facilitate a conversation. Several commissioners resisted language that implied formal punitive measures, noting that peer accountability is different from staff performance processes.

The board also debated who should do any final wordsmithing to produce a polished public document. Some members urged keeping the language as-is to reflect the board’s authentic voice; others asked staff to route the draft to a single reviewer for final editing. A few commissioners expressed concern about public perception and suggested limited editing by communications staff or a board‑designated reviewer.

Direction and next steps: staff was asked to produce a trimmed, one‑page final version incorporating the board’s agreed edits and the accountability process described above. Commissioners suggested printing and laminating a few copies to keep at the board table. No formal vote was taken; the session was a working session focused on drafting and direction rather than formal adoption.

Ending: Commissioners closed the discussion after agreeing on the main substantive edits and a pragmatic accountability approach, and asked staff to return with the cleaned, one‑page version for final consideration and distribution.","Commissioners discussed and edited a draft working agreement during the April 1 work session, focusing on clearer communication rules, streamlined language, and a practical accountability process; staff will finalize an updated one-page version for the board.","actionData","errors"]

Article not found

Pitkin County hears 30% design for solid waste center expansion; board asked for cost estimates and return in fall

Habitat asks Pitkin County for up to $1M to support modular housing factory in Rifle; commissioners seek more detail and partners

Pitkin County commissioners revise working agreement, emphasize accountability and brevity