Commerce City subdivision proposal would add 84 homes near Chambers Road
Reunion Filing 39 would add 84 homes near Chambers Road, while traffic studies and public comments raise questions about infrastructure; no Planning Commission action was posted as of Sept. 3.
A proposed subdivision near Chambers Road and Heartland Drive would add 84 homes to Commerce City, but the official case record reviewed Sept. 3 did not show whether the Planning Commission acted at its Sept. 1 hearing.
Reunion Filing 39 would divide about 22.46 acres into 84 lots and six tracts for open space, utilities and drainage. The subdivision report recommends approval to the City Council. It says an executed development agreement requires roadway and signal-related improvements, including an additional southbound lane and turn and acceleration lanes along Chambers Road, a portion of East 112th Avenue, and a contribution toward a future traffic signal at Chambers Road and Heartland Drive.
The proposal is part of a broader development area that includes Reunion Filing 40, a 203-lot project. A traffic study evaluating both filings projects 287 homes and 2,796 weekday vehicle trips, including 206 morning peak-hour trips and 277 evening peak-hour trips.
For 2045, the study projects two evening-peak movements at level of service E: the eastbound left turns at Chambers Road and East 112th Avenue, and at Chambers Road and East 104th Avenue. It reports those conditions in both background-traffic and total-traffic scenarios and attributes them to background traffic rather than the Reunion filings. The study assumes future widening and other improvements, including a four-lane Chambers Road, ultimate improvements to East 112th Avenue and a six-lane East 104th Avenue. It recommends lengthening several turn lanes at Chambers Road and East 112th Avenue to address projected queues.
The study also models a signal at Chambers Road and Heartland Drive. Oakwood Homes’ response to public comments says the city plans to install the signal in 2027 and that the city-approved study found acceptable operations through 2045 apart from the identified background-traffic conditions. The response says Filing 40 would build the portion of East 112th Avenue next to that subdivision. The supplied record does not resolve the broader corridor’s design, timing or funding.
The city received 20 public comments during the notice period. The public-comment attachment records requests for hearings, delays or denials and concerns about cumulative traffic, pedestrian and bicycle safety, emergency response, water pressure and supply, sewer and electrical capacity, wildfire safety, school transportation, retail and community amenities, and metropolitan-district taxes and governance. The comments document residents’ concerns and requests; they do not establish that the alleged deficiencies occurred.
Oakwood said water and utility modeling had been reviewed by the South Adams County Water and Sanitation District and that the projects would include water and sewer lines, hydrants and other required infrastructure. The company said fire officials and utility agencies raised no capacity or safety objections during referral review. It also said no separate wildfire-mitigation analysis was performed for dry, high-wind conditions along the Buffalo Run Golf Course.
School District 27J said in an Aug. 20 letter that Turnberry Elementary was expected to have about 540 students during the 2026-27 school year, compared with a building capacity of 874. The district also cited planned additions of 825 middle-school seats and 1,800 high-school seats for 2027-28, along with a possible 675-student K-8 facility. In its letter to the city, the district said capacity was expected to be adequate depending on construction timing, while acknowledging that some students could be bused more than three miles to Turnberry.
Oakwood said the filings would be included in the Reunion Village or Reunion Ridge metropolitan districts under service plans approved in 2019 and would not affect taxes in residents’ current districts. Questions about district tax levels, governance and existing infrastructure obligations remain matters for the metropolitan districts and the city.
As of Sept. 3, the official Planning Commission case record listed Filing 39 as “Agenda Ready,” with no posted final action or action-history record. The available materials do not document a recommendation, approval, denial, continuance or added conditions from the Sept. 1 hearing. The City Council calendar lists Oct. 5 as the next scheduled regular meeting, but the supplied record does not establish whether Filing 39 will be considered then.