Planning Commission Agenda and Packet 2012 10 25

Home Browse Search

Planning Commission Meeting Minutes September 13, 2012 Page 5 of 7 Keep in mind the silent majority that do not come to a city meeting or work shop. Commission Comments: Lipton discussed the following: The plan should not put transit over development within the City. The plan should encourage more focus on the center of town: schools, transportation and other services. Staff should take the time to get the endorsement of the community. The end result should be about the Plan and not meeting a date timeline. Moline thanked staff for the presentation. He also stated he appreciated the charrette presentations and how it all fit together. He thanked Lipton for his comments and agreed the community should be a top priority. Pritchard stated this was his second opportunity to see the presentation. He stated public awareness and support is very important. Brauneis stated he was impressed with the charrette and the level of detail. Pritchard asked staff to think about how we can reach out to the younger population of Louisville. Update to HWY 42 Gateway McMillan reviewed the project with the following discussion items: 2003: HWY 42 Revitalization Area Comprehensive Plan Amendment adoption 2007: title 17.14 Adopted in the Louisville Municipal Code 2010: 5-step Implementation Plan – Infrastructure Focus Project is jointly funded by the City of Louisville, Boulder County, the CDOT and the RTD. Objects of the Plan is two-fold: 1)Initial design of a South Street connection between Downtown Louisville and the Revitalization District across the BNSF right-of-way; creating a multi-modal connection to the proposed RTD station and a regional connection between the Goodhue Ditch Trail and the Coal Creek Trail 2)Initial design of a context sensitive and multi-modal corridor for HWY 42 between Lock Street and the northern City limits (Paschal Drive). McMillan continued with the following update on the progress of the project. The South Street Connection design overview and objectives. Images outlining the differences between a 9 foot tall underpass and a 10 foot tall underpass. Initial architectural context examples for the gateway Base alignment alternative for HWY 42. Commission questions and comments: