Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Public Comment topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Residents and a civil engineer fault county management as water-and-contracting problems plague Kinnickinn Road project
Summary
Residents at a Montrose County work session blamed irrigation and county choices for escalating damage to Kinnickinn Road; a civil engineer cited an HDR memo and questioned quantity tracking, contractor selection and oversight as work stalled and costs rose.
Residents and a civil engineer used a county work session on April 30 to press Montrose County officials for faster repairs to Kinnickinn Road and to challenge how the project was managed.
Carol Lee Anzel, a resident who said she has lived on Kenneken/Kinnickinn Road for 44 years, described higher costs for hauling water and hay, disrupted deliveries and longer emergency routes after the closure. "We are asking for our road back," she told commissioners, adding that the school bus no longer stops on the road.
Multiple residents recounted safety incidents during recent wildfire activity and warned that limited egress left neighbors vulnerable. Jeff Downs said he and a ranch hand contained a small lightning-started fire and that larger wildfires could have trapped residents because the damaged road was their only nearby route.
Several residents directly attributed the slope failures to irrigation practices above the road. Dean Cooper, a civil engineer, told the board he is "100% confident" irrigation water is the cause and quoted an HDR engineering memo saying that the proposed temporary slope design stabilizes the downslope area while the upper slope remains unstable. Cooper pressed the county on whether stamped, signed drawings and adequate contractor oversight existed and questioned how the bid quantities for imported rock fill were measured and tracked.
Residents accused the county of poor early choices in contractor selection and site management; some suggested county leadership turnover and staffing changes contributed to lapses. Commissioners acknowledged mistakes early in the project and said they are taking responsibility for past leadership choices; staff said they have tracked remaining rock quantities and retained records of unsuitable materials removed from the site.
At least one resident proposed alternatives such as shifting the road alignment by purchasing adjacent property; another asked whether a single-lane, local-traffic-only reopening could be staged. County staff said such alternatives had not been fully discussed and reiterated that a hydrology study would be needed for any permanent solution.
No formal votes or findings were produced at the session. Several residents said they would consider legal action if the county did not restore access; the board scheduled further discussion and possible action for May 6.
