ParkBull Home

I S S U E S !


NEWS FOR NEIGHBORS
Park County, Colorado

Park County
BULL!etin
Issue
Discussion Forum
Park County
Politics
Fire
Links
Links of
Local Interest
BOCC
Agenda


CHRONOLOGICAL STUDY OF PARK COUNTY ROAD 43
SUBMITTED BY PARK COUNTY COMMISSIONER LENI WALKER
APRIL 28, 2002

Upon information and belief, the following documented facts are presented as an account of events leading up to building CR 43 and the potential settlement of pending litigation.  This document should not be construed to contain every fact from September 30, 1992 to the present as the redundancy and minutia is too burdensome to present here.  Redundancy is not the purpose of this document, but rather the presentation of an objective overview.  The source material is available for viewing, purchasing or copying at the Annex Building in Fairplay. 

 

CHRONOLOGICAL SEQUENCE OF EVENTS CONCERNING CR 43, ETC.

 

September 30, 1992:  Dozier paid $25,000 for a highway 285 right turn lane onto Bulldogger Rd.  Using these funds, the county built the turn lane.  This was to serve Dozier’s commercial land via a 60’ wide strip of Dozier land contiguous with the 285 right-of-way.  (Noted on the recorded plat of Mill Iron D.  See Park County General Ledger)

 

December 19, 1993:  Dozier submits a revised IGA via his attorney, E. Fazekas.  “Enclosed are revised versions of the Intergovernmental Agreement between Park County and the Deer Creek Metropolitan District and the Exchange Agreement among Dozier and CO., the Dozier Family and Park County.  (Letter dated December 19, 1993 with attached proposed IGA.)

 

1995:  Platte Canyon School District undertook study and promotion of a bond issue to build a new high school on State Land Board property partially fronting 285 at approximately mile marker 225 in Park County.  School bus access and safety were a primary concern.

 

Harley Hamilton, county planner at that time, developed a plan that became known as the Midway Intersection and showed on his plan how the property could be safely accessed.  A study was needed and funds were solicited from the school district, county, State Land Board and the Dozier family.  (See fact dated October 19, 1995 and reference in BOCC Resolution 98-2.) 

 

May 23, 1995:  Dozier appears in front of Planning Commission for:  “REZONING – R1 (RESIDENTIAL) TO PUD (PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT) – MILL IRON D LOTS 15 – 16”.  “Nancy Baker moved to table for two weeks to check out the water augmentation plan second by John Stone.  Judy Robins needed to be excused at 3:35 pm.”  Motion carried unanimously.  (Park County Planning Commission minutes – May 23, 1995)

 

July 11, 1995:  Dozier appears in front of Planning Commission for:  “REZONING – R1 (RESIDENTIAL) TO PUD (PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT) – MILL IRON D LOTS 15 – 16.  “Judy Robbins moved to deny the application for rezoning to PUD as we need to protect residential areas, and it is not a hardship sense there is already a place to put commercial buildings, and there is no compelling reason for the rezoning, second by Nancy Baker.”  Motion carried unanimously.  (Park County Planning Commission minutes – July 11, 1995)

 

October 10, 1995:  Dozier appears in front of Planning Commission for:  “REZONING – TO PUD MILL IRON D ESTATES LOTS 15 & 16.  “John Stone moved to table this application as he feels it is premature and he wants to see a traffic study done before hearing this again, second by Maury Reiber.  Motion carried unanimously.  (Park County Planning Commission Minutes, Oct. 10, 1995)

 

October 19, 1995:  Park County approved $2500.00.  “Harley Hamilton, Building and Zoning Director, stated this money will be used for a highway study in the Crow Hill area.  Tokatloglou moved to appropriate $2500 from the 1996 budget and to send a letter of intent to support to the Department of Transportation.  Motion seconded by Walters.  Carried unanimously.”  (From the minutes, Commissioners Meeting, October 19, 1995.)

 

March 8, 1996:  Leigh, Scott & Cleary, Inc completed a traffic study called Traffic Impact Analysis Deer Creek Valley Park County, Colorado.  (Go to the end of these dates for quotes from the study.)

 

May, 1996:  State Land Board abandoned its interest in constructing access to its holdings opposite Dozier’s land.  The school district decided against further participation.  The county’s position was that it could not contribute financially, but would contribute “in kind” by building the realignments of CR 43 and Bulldogger, and the cul-de-sac to serve the Crow Hill Bible Church.  (BOCC Minutes, May 2, 1996)

 

May 2, 1996:  Lou Gonzalez sends letter-opposing Midway.  (See Letter)

 

May 10, 1996:  Article appears in Flume:  “Study of Crow Hill traffic continues”  (See Article)

 

July 19, 1996:  Article appears in Flume:  “Something needs to be done, but what?”  (See Article)

 

August, 1996:  Dozier submitted a development plan for his property that did not include the Midway.  Access was from Bulldogger to a cul-de-sac and similarly from CR 43.  (See sketch plan.)

 

September 16, 1996:  . . . Park County prefers Midway over Dozier’s sketch plan that does not include the Midway Access.  Lou Gonzales, patron, asked about the encroachment on residential lots at the midway intersection.  Peters said all the details would be worked out at the Planning Commission.  Gonzales asked about the plans Duke Dozier had before the Planning Commission.  Dozier said he had proceeded with his project because he felt the midway intersection may not happen and he did not want to delay if the midway project fell through.”. . .  “Trast moved to direct Leigh Scott and Cleary to make application to Colorado Department of Transportation for hwy access at the midway location and for Rick Peters to undertake discussions with the appropriate parties to develop a construction phasing plan and a proposal for funding among the interested parties.  Tokatloglou seconded the motion.”  Carried unanimously.    (From the minutes, Special Meeting, September 16, 1996) 

 

September 19, 1996:  Dozier tables sketch plan that does not include the Midway.  “Jim Rice read a letter from James Dozier requesting the plan be tabled in light of the new changes to the Mid Way intersection.  A new Sketch Plan will be presented to the Planning Commission.”  (From the minutes, Commissioners Meeting, September 19, 1996.)

 

December 3, 1996:  CDOT approved an application from the County to build the Midway.  (See Application)

 

March 25, 1997:  Dozier appears in front of Planning Commission for:  “ITEM #1 REVISED SKETCH PLAN – DEER CREEK CORNERS”.  “Lou Gonzalez made the motion to table the revised sketch plan for Deer Creek Corners based on these findings:  1.  That the road as presented places an undue burden on the residential lots 15 and 16.  2.  It is inappropriate to condition one part of the sketch plan that it would mandate a rezoning of another piece of property.  3.  The board request that the applicant come back with a sketch plan with a new road alignment that would not place that kind of a burden on residential zoned lots.”  Carried unanimously.  Discussion . . . Gonzalez is recused by a unanimous vote.  Lewie Parker was seated in place of Gonzalez as a voting member.  “Willie made the motion to deny the request for rezoning by Duke Dozier Family Trust based on the following criteria: 1.  This is an established Residential Zone and does not allow for Town Homes.  2.  The Town Homes would increase the density.  3.  The run off water to the wetlands could become contaminated.  4.  The realignment of the road was not acceptable to the board.  Second by Lew Parker.  All ayes carried.”  (Planning Commission Minutes March 25, 1997)

 

May 15, 1997:  Planning Commission temporarily disbanded.  (See BOCC Meeting, May 15, 1997, article on front page of the Greater Guffey Community News, letter from BOCC and Press Release.) 

 

July 3, 1997:   BOCC approves Plat Amendment for Deer Creek Corners.  (BOCC Meeting, July 3, 1997 Resolution 97 – 50)  BOCC approves PUD Plan for Deer Creek Corners.  (BOCC Meeting, July 3, 1997 Resolution  97 – 51):  See event for October 16, 1997.

 

August 1 – August 22, 1997:  Public notice in Flume concerning public meetings as follows:  August 13, 1997 in Lake George Comm. Center; August 19, 1997 in Bailey Crow Hill Building; August 26, 1997 in Fairplay Annex and August 27, 1997 I Guffey Community Center.  Topics of discussion deal with duties, performance, etc., of Planning Commission

 

August 4, 1997:  Mill Iron D filed a lawsuit questioning the legality of the portion of the Dozier development facing Buggy Whip Road in District Court in Fairplay.  The Plaintiffs asked ex-parte for the court to issue a temporary restraining order (TRO).  Denied.  (See 97 CV 107 Complaint)

 

September 4, 1997:  BOCC approved the funding for the Midway construction.  “Trast stated that a lot of study has gone into the proposed intersection and that both the State and consultants were saying that this was the best solution to the situation.  A statement of proposed costs and funding for the intersection was given.  CDOT would pay $154,000, Park County $165,687 and the Deer Creek Metro District $201,388.  Walters moved to approve the funding of the Midway intersection based on the figures presented, Benninghoven seconded the motion.”  After discussion, the motion carried unanimously.  (From the minutes, BOCC Meeting September 4, 1997)

 

October 16, 1997:  BOCC approves Amended Plat, nunc pro tunc to July 3, 1997.  (Amended Plat)  See event on July 3, 1997.

 

December 18, 1997:  Planning Commission is re-appointed.  Members are:  William G. Gordon, John L. Casanova, Kelvin M. Washington, Judith L. Robbins and Cecil J. De Lange.  Alternates are:  Louis Gonzalez and Carolyn Snodgrass.  (Proceedings of the Board of County Commissioners, December 18, 1997; Resolution 97-110)

 

January 8, 1998:  Dozier received County approval of the Deer Creek Corners final Plat.  (Proceedings of the Board of County Commissioners, January 8, 1998)

 

January 21, 1998:  Mill Iron D filed an expanded complaint in Federal District Court located in Denver.  The Plaintiffs asked ex-parte for the court (Judge Matsch) to issue a temporary restraining order (TRO).  Denied.  The court instructed the Plaintiffs to withdraw from Federal Court and seek relief in the District Court in Fairplay.  (See Summons and Complaint, 98-M-108)

 

February 4, 1998:  Mill Iron D filed an amended (federal version) complaint in the District Court in Fairplay and again asked (ex-parte) for a TRO.  Granted.   A week later, in an open hearing, the court dissolved the TRO and Dozier was free to proceed with road building.  (Summons and Complaint, 97CV107)

 

February 5, 1998:  IGAs finalized between CDOT and the County; and between the County and Deer Creek Metro District.  Deer Creek Metro District would pay for paving of the interior roads, construction engineering, earthwork and base construction of 285.  CDOT would pay for pavement within the 285 right-of-way and for a 3-way traffic signal. 

 

In addition the in-kind contribution, the county obligated itself to demolish the Bulldogger access to 285, and to a future connection of Rosalie Road to the new Midway, and to future actions that would prevent traffic at the CR 72/43 intersection with 285 from reaching warrant levels.  All parties had agreed that the CR 72/43/285 intersection was unsafe and that the configuration did not justify investment.  Midway’s purported purpose was to siphon off traffic from “old” 43 and any future development on State Land Board property to the new intersection.  (From the minutes, BOCC Meeting February 5, 1998 and Resolution 98 – 2; IGAs and taped recording of meeting.)

 

February 23, 1998:  the recall.  C.J. De Lange, Bob Barford and Lynda James (DBJ) replaced Doug Walters, Steve Benninghoven and Richard Trast.

 

February 26, 1998:  The DBJ BOCC’s first official meeting, during Patrons Comments, Albert Glienke discussed the FOMID lawsuit.  The BOCC went into executive session and discussed the FOMID litigation.   (Taken from the minutes.) 

 

April 1, 1998:  Park County failed to perform the land exchange by this contracted date.  (See Land Exchange Agreement.)

 

April 2, 1998:  “Barford stated, in coming out of Executive Session at 6:45pm, they had discussed filing an extension in the Mill Iron D case because of the new Board having secured new legal counsel.  They had discussed the status of an intergovernmental agreement and a letter from Attorney Fazekas asking the Board to confirm the agreement on the Midway intersection, they will not do so until they meet with CDOT.”  (From the minutes, BOCC Meeting April 2, 1998)

 

April 10, 1998:  Park County will not issue permits for the approved PUD.  “James moved to instruct the BOCC attorney that no permits would be issued for the PUD because of the potential of greater liability regarding the litigation with Friends of Mill Iron D and stipulate to that in a preliminary injunction hearing.  DeLange seconded the motion, carried unanimously.

 

Barford stated that in Executive Session, the Commissioners and their attorney met with Friends of Mill Iron D at their request and discussed a potential for settlement.  They discussed the injunction hearing and considered several options, of which on was the motion made above.  No decisions were made in Executive Session.”  (BOCC SPECIAL MEETING, April 10, 1998.

 

April 14, 1998:  Citing the litigation between Mill Iron D and Dozier as cause, the BOCC petitioned the District Court in Fairplay to issue a preliminary injunction prohibiting construction of any work at the northern end of the project, thereby blocking a portion of the realigned CR 43 and halting road construction in 1998.  “Again, I want to reiterate the parameters of the injunction.  The county will be permitted to issue a CO to - - as to the existing building.  The defendants are enjoined from altering the road.  They’re enjoined from construction a water tank.  They’re enjoined from constructing any further sewage facility there, and basically they’re enjoined from doing anything which hasn’t already been done, except for the certificate of occupancy, and naturally that implies that the building may be occupied at this time.”  Granted.   (See Order dated 4-14-98 and transcript.) 

April 23, 1998:  Selection of County Attorney.  “DeLange moved, based on previous discussion, to authorize a contract arrangement between the County and Robert C. Widner for County Attorney, James seconded.”  Motion carried unanimously.  (From the minutes, BOCC Special Meeting Bailey April 23, 1998)

 

May 20, 1998:  A fatal accident occurred at the intersection of 43/72/285.  (From the minutes,  June 4, 1998.)

 

May 20, 1998:  “Concerning the IGA with the Deer Creek Metro Dist., it was the opinion of the county attorney that Dozier & Associates had not fulfilled their part of the agreement either, and furthermore the time limit has expired.”  [Dozier cured the defect.]  (From the minutes, Special BOCC Meeting, May 20, 1998.)

 

June 4, 1998:  At a meeting that took place in Shawnee, De Lange moved that the BOCC request that due to pending litigation concerning the road extension from the proposed Midway intersection to existing CR 43, the Midway Intersection project on US 285 be put on hold until the next CDOT fiscal year.  After the pending litigation is resolved and concluded, the Park County BOCC will contact CDOT to re-establish discussion to determine the next steps to resolve the US 285 traffic impact and turn requirements in the area from Roland Creek to Crow Hill.  Barford seconded the motion for purposes of discussion.

 

After discussion, call for the vote:  DeLange-yes, Barford-no, James-no; motion denied.

 

James moved to ask CDOT to add left turn lanes from US 285 on to Rosalie and Bulldogger roads, and 1 or 2 through lanes, at the recommendation of CDOT, and to ask CDOT to use the committed funds for a light at CR 43 & 72.  Barford seconded.  After discussion, James asked to have the motion voted on in two parts.  The motion was restated to ask CDOT to add turning lanes from Hwy 285 on to Rosalie and Bulldogger roads, also add 1 or 2 through lanes on 285 as recommended by CDOT, for this fiscal year.

 

Vote:  De Lange-abstained, Barford-yes, James-yes.  Motion carried.

 

James stated the second part of the motion was to instruct CDOT that they would like the allotted money for this fiscal year for an intersection on 285 be used for a traffic light at the CR 43 & 72 & Hwy 285 intersection.

 

Vote:  De Lange-yes, Barford-yes, James-yes, carried unanimously. (From the minutes.)

 

June 12, 1998:  County is served with a Summons and Complaint alleging claims of Breach of Contract and Promissory Estoppel.  The cited issue is the construction of the realigned CR 43. (Complaint signed June 10, 1998 and served on June 12, 1998.)

 

June 19, 1998:  The BOCC called a meeting with CDOT at the Fire District building in Bailey.  They formally requested CDOT fund and erect a traffic signal at the CR 72/43 intersection.  CDOT reluctantly acquiesced on two conditions:  (1) CDOT be relieved of all responsibility in their IGA with the County concerning construction of the Midway, and (2) the County must close off the Bulldogger access and re-stripe highway 285 such that there would be a dedicated left turn lane into Rosalie Road.  Rick Peters, Matt Ray, Pam Hutton, Chuck Binford, Lynda James were in attendance.  (Closing Bulldogger denied Dozier the access for which he had paid $25,000 in 1992. (Recorded tape and notes from CDOT.) 

 

June 29, 1998:  “Barford stated that in Executive Session they discussed the current status of the Mill Iron D Case and are essentially maintaining the status quo in terms of the litigation and intergovernmental agreement with the Midway intersection.”  (From the minutes, Special BOCC Meeting, June 29, 1998.)

 

1998:  Bulldogger is closed.

 

August, 1998 - May, 1999:  CDOT causes the signalization of 43/72/285.

 

October 13, 1998:  All Parties agree to a Stipulated Preliminary Injunction And Order and agree that parties are restrained from:  “a.  entering into any contracts, agreements, or understandings that would impair or, in any way, adversely affect the enforcement of the IGA, so that the rights, duties and obligations of the parties under the IGA, shall remain intact, unaffected and unimpaired by this preliminary injunction.  This preliminary injunction, however, shall not in any way restrict CDOT from proceeding, or the County sending to CDOT a letter concurring with CDOT proceeding, as CDOT deems appropriate, with the installation of traffic signals at the intersection of County Roads 43/72 and State Highway 285, and the blockading of Bulldogger Road to emergency access only, all without prejudice to the Midway Intersection.  b. expending the funds of Park County which have been appropriated for the construction pursuant to the IGA, and those funds appropriated are represented by Defendant to be not less than $124,000, without Defendant admitting liability of any kind under the IGA.” (See the STIPULATED PRELIMINARY INJUNCTION AND ORDER, #98 CV 77)

 

November 5, 1998:  Executed contracts from February 5, 1998 and the Stipulated Preliminary Injunction were in place for the Midway, and Mill Iron D litigation was on-going when “Barford moved to approve the application to CDOT to realign the intersection at Hwy285/CR3 [sic] with the provision that public notice be given to seek citizen comments in writing to the BOCC before the hearing date, and that cost sharing continue to be explored to minimize the cost to the County.  DeLange seconded, carried 3-0.  James suggested that a work session be set to put together an IGA between the County7, CDOT and any other partners and developers.”  (From the minutes, BOCC Meeting, November 5, 1998.) 

 

November 19, 1998:  BOCC approves new official zoning map.  Lot 20 in Mill Iron D reflects commercial zoning.

 

February 10, 1999:  Deer Creek Metro District applies for CDOT access via Permit #199008.  (See the State Highway Access Permit Application and Terms and Conditions, February 10, 1999.)

 

March 24, 1999:  Deer Creek Metropolitan District is granted an Access Permit #199008 from CDOT for commercial access on the west side of Highway 285, a distance of 104 feet south of MP. 225 or M.P. 224.98.  (See State Highway Access Permit, date of issue March 24, 1999.)

 

April 29, 1999:  Deer Creek Metropolitan District receives a NOTICE TO PROCEED from CDOT.  (See Notice to Proceed, April 29, 1999.)

 

January 20, 2000:  CDOT grants an extension of permit #199008 through March 24, 2001.  (See request from Dozier to CDOT, January 14, 2000 and  letter from CDOT, January 20, 2000.)

 

February 29, 2000:  Judge Plotz of the District Court in Fairplay enters FINAL RULE AND ORDER, granting condemnation of portions of Lots 15 and 16 for the benefit of planned street improvements.  [Note:  The act of condemnation makes any covenants attached to the portion of the condemned property of no effect.]  (See STIPULATION FOR ENTRY OF FINAL RULE AND ORDER and FINAL RULE AND ORDER in 00 CV 07)

 

November 2, 2000:  CDOT conditionally accepts Highway Improvements permitted under #199008.  [These are the turn lanes that now exist on 285.]  (See letter RE:  Conditional Acceptance of Highway Improvements, Access Permit No. 199008 dated November 2, 2000 and letter dated October 31, 2000 by Martin/Martin Consulting Engineers.)

 

November 2000:  Election replaces James with Walker and replaces De Lange with Staples.  Solberg has 2 years remaining in his term from District 3.

 

November 16, 2000:  Mill Iron D settles with Dozier et. al.   (See Stipulated Settlement Agreement)

 

“7. Dozier, its officers, agents, successors, and assigns including, without limitation, the District, shall not seek to vacate the roadway currently designated as County Road 43, or any part thereof, for a period of five (5) years after the date of this agreement.  Notwithstanding the foregoing, nothing contained herein shall preclude Dozier, its officers, agents, successors, and assigns, including, without limitation the District, from supporting the vacation of all or any portion of the roadway currently designated as County Road 43 at any time including the 5 year period after the date hereof should such issue be placed before the Board for formal action thereon by an independent third party, the Board, or the County itself.  (See letter dated December 14, 2000 by David L. Morin, member of FOMID, quoting Settlement and Settlement.)

 

“The Parties agree that the issue of parking and access to the County Library located on Lot 20 is a future Park County decision and not an issue to be addressed in the PUD Amendment application.  However, Dozier and the District agree not to initiate at any time an application or request for any new entries or exits to or from his commercial development through the library parking lot or to or from Buggywhip or Bulldogger Road.  Notwithstanding the foregoing, Dozier and the District expressly reserve all rights to enforce existing agreements between Park County, and Dozier or the District, to the extent that such agreements are not in conflict with this agreement.  The Board expressly reserves all rights to contest the validity of such existing agreements.”  (See letter dated Oct. 1, 2001 by David L. Morin, President of Mill Iron D Home Owners’ Association quoting Settlement and Settlement.)

 

November 28, 2000:  Court lifts injunction that prohibited construction on the north end of CR 43.  (See Order Vacating Preliminary Injunction and Releasing Bonds, signed November 28, 2000.)

 

[Note:  At this time, the County did not take positive action to settle or perform obligations pursuant to the contract(s) dated February 5, 1998.]

 

January 9, 2001:  New board sworn in.

 

February 2001:  New board enters into settlement discussions concerning the contracts.

 

July 17, 2001:  County is served with a Summons and Amended Complaint signed on July 10, 2001.  (See Summons and Amended Complaint, 01 CV 48 alleging claims of Breach of Contract and Promissory Estoppel.)

 

November, 2001:  County realigns/configures CR 43 under the terms of the contract, with some modifications according to a plan signed on October 15, 1997 by Mountain Planning and Engineering. This action serves 2 purposes.  (1) It demonstrates the BOCC’s good faith toward settlement.  (2) Should the matter ultimately be litigated, this action also serves to mitigate damages claimed by Dozier.  The modifications serve to protect the access of existing “Delwood” businesses for traffic flows coming from the area of Harris Park and subdivisions in between; and also to allow access for traffic from businesses located on the new alignment to the existing “Delwood” businesses.  This section of road is scheduled for blacktop in May, 2001(See drawing)

 

Notes from the traffic study are as follows:

 

Pages E-1 – E-2. 

 

·   “The US 285/Bull Dogger/Rosalie intersection is located at a poor location near the end of a long downgrade and encourages traffic on local residential roads such as Buggy Whip.”

 

·   “CR 43 has a poor alignment just north of US 285.  It is both unsafe and offers an indirect route for CR 43 traffic headed for eastbound US 285.”

 

·   “The US 285/CR 43/CR 72 intersection is located at a poor location near the top of a downgrade and at the edge of a horizontal curve.”

 

·   “A location midway between the US 285/BullDogger/Rosalie intersection and the US 285/CR 43/CR 72 intersection offers a better location on grade with plenty of sight distance in both directions.  This location is designated as the US 285/Deer Creek Plaza for the purpose of this study.”

 

·   “Construction of a link between the proposed US 285/Deer Creek Plaza and CR 43 would provide a safer and more direct route for CR 43 traffic headed for eastbound US 285.”

 

·   “The US 285/Deer Creek Plaza is an ideal location to access the State LAND board property located south of US 285.”

 

·   “An alternate route for CR 72 south of US 285 could be provided through the State Land Board property and connecting to US 285 at the proposed Deer Creek Plaza intersection.”

 

·   “In light of these issues and opportunities, the study6 committee developed three access options:

 

Access Option 1:

This Option involves the construction of a new channelized intersection at the Deer Creek Plaza location on US 285.  It would provide access to the Dozier property north of US 285 and to the State Land Board property south of US 285, facilitating a “town-center” type of development.  A traffic signal would be installed if warranted and a direct connection from US 285 to CR 43 constructed.  Bull Dogger would be cut off from US 285 reducing through traffic on Bull Dogger and Buggy Whip.  A cul-de-sac would be constructed on Bull Dogger just north of US 285 and a road constructed between Bull Dogger and the Deer Creek Plaza Road to provide access to the existing County library and offices and planned new development.  Roads would be constructed on the State Land Board property to provide access to US 285 opposite the Deer Creek Plaza access and to CR 72.

 

Access Option 2:

This option is identical to Access Option 1 except that CR 72 has been cut off from US 285 south of the existing US 285/CR 43/CR 72 intersection.  The CR 72 approach to the existing intersection has a poor alignment involving both a horizontal and vertical curve.  CR 72 traffic now using the existing intersection would use the connection to US 285 constructed through the State Land Board property.

 

Access Option 3:

This option would involve installation of traffic signals, if warranted, at the UJS 285/Bull Dogger/Rosalie intersection and at the US 285/CR 43/CR 72 intersection.  The Deer Creek Plaza/State Land Board access intersection with US 285 would be constructed as a right-turn-in/right-turn-out intersection, prohibiting through and left-turn movements.  Bull Dogger would continue its connection to US 285 and the other access roads proposed for the Dozier and State Land Board properties would be similar to the other Access Options.”

 

Page I-1

 

Reduce conflicts on US 285:  From a safety standpoint, any conflicts among turning vehicles produces the potential for accidents in the study area.  Separation of conflicting movements will reduce accident potential.  Appropriate assignment of right-of-way through installation of a traffic signal will also reduce accidents.  Access Option 1 received a positive rating because it channels the heavy southbound left-turn movements at the US 285/Bull Dogger/Rosalie intersection to the new US 285/Deer Creek Plaza intersection where they can be controlled at a signalized intersection.  Also, since west-bound right turns onto Bull Dogger will be eliminated, the westbound right turn lane on US 285 in this area can be reconfigured to provide a westbound left turn lane on US 285 for Rosalie traffic - - a movement that is currently not accommodated.  Access Option 2 received a higher positive rating since it was similar to Option 1 but also eliminated the northbound left-turn movement at US 285 and CR 72, which is currently a hazardous movement due to the alignment and geometrics of the intersection. Access Option 3 also received a positive rating due to the two traffic signals and control of access at the RTO US 285/Deer Creek Plaza intersection.

 

Improve operations on US 285:  Since US 285 is a Corridor of Statewide Significance, facilitating the movement of through traffic on US 285 should be a major goal.  The presence of traffic signals in all three Access Options reduces the operational level of service on US 285 since through traffic has to occasionally stop at a red light compared to free flow conditions that currently exist.  All three Access Options were given negative ratings with Access Option 3 receiving a double negative due to the presence of two traffic signals.”

 

Page I-3

 

Reduce traffic on CR 43 curves:  Due to the terrain and topography of the area, CR 43 has to make sharp curves north of the US 285 intersection.  Diverting traffic form these curves will reduce the accident potential caused by these curves.  With the direct connector linking CR 43 with the US 285/Deer Creek Plaza intersection, these sharp curves can be avoided by CR 43 trips desiring to travel to and from US 285 east.  All three options were given positive ratings.”

 

Page I-4

 

Evaluation Summary

In summary, Access Option 1 received seven positive ratings and one negative rating; Access Option 2 received seven positive ratings and two negative ratings; and Access Option 3 received four positive ratings and four negative ratings. If all evaluation criteria were equally weighted, it appears that Access Option 1 is the desired Access Option.  The community might feel, however, that the safety benefits of eliminating the CR 72 access to US 285 might outweigh the small increase in VMT that this causes which would make Access Option 2 the preferred Option.”

 

(Look at page K-1)

 

End of notes from the study.

 

 

 



The Park County Bulletin does not warrant the contents of any documents or sites linked in any part of the parkbull.com domain.



Park County
BULL!etin
Issue
Discussion Forum
Park County
Politics
Fire
Links
Links of
Local Interest
BOCC
Agenda