City Council Minutes 1994 03 15 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

south side of Dyer Road. The scenarios presented by the applicant represented a configuration of Dyer Road, providing for two lanes weE~tbound into the project with a free right off of McCaslin into Dyer Road, three lanes exiting eastbound with a left only, a left, and[ a through, with a fourth free right heading southbound on McCaslin to U.S. 36. Council comments on the ROW issue had focused on the City's ability concerning condemnation, the cumulative impacts on Dyer Road with the potential development of the Morrison annexation to the west, and possibly Homart to the north, as to whether it would involve an additional collector tying into Dyer Road and pedestrian safety with regard to sidewalks and traffic signals. There were 10 conditions of approval, one of which was acquiring the ROW on Dyer Road for those road improvements. He explained that the Subdivision Agreement stands revised short of final language addressing Dyer Road. Tom Phare, Public Works Director, reviewed overhead projections showing the intersection today vs. how it may exist in the future. He commented that the developer did a traffic analysis regarding his project and its impact on traffic. The analysis showed the improvements that were necessary, which were less than the unconstrained option. Public Works negotiated with the developer for improvements as defined in the unconstrained. There will need to be an additional ROW, which is where the problem exists now. He con~ented that the Public Works Department reviewed the traffic enqlineering report. He explained that the City could be facing an inadequate roadway in months/years, depending on the pace of development in Centennial Valley. Sisk commented that when the PUD was approved, the unconstrained option was approved as part of the approval process. That was what was presented to Council, and was approved by Planning Commission and City Council, and recommended by Public Works. Phare stated that it provides flexibility and additional capacity foi' anticipated and unanticipated developments to the west. Bob Brisnehan, P.O. Box 337, Louisville, Colorado, explained that they tried to acquire the needed property, but problems developed with the property that had been dedicated to the City by Homart Development. He stated that the unconstrained is best. Davidson called for Council comments and questions. Sisk reviewed the progression of communication between Brisnehan and[ Homart. Brisnehan stated that they wanted recovery rights, if Homart uses Dyer Road. 7