Laserfiche WebLink
Metadata
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015 Laserfiche. All rights reserved.
Planning Commission <br />Meeting Minutes <br />September 12", 2019 <br />Page 9 of 12 <br />Hoefner noted that walking and biking and safety were the most important community <br />issues but the highest dollar amounts were going to road -widening projects and he <br />wondered whether the financial priorities matched the input from the community. He <br />asked if the reduction of a 3-minute delay was worth $25 million. <br />Moline noted that some road projects included multi -modal elements, as well. <br />Ritchie noted that the cost of that project would not be borne entirely by the City. The <br />City had funding to do additional study for the Highway 42 in partnership with Lafayette <br />and Boulder County. <br />Libhart noted that the ones that are high -priority and short-term could be completed in 5 <br />to 10 years, such as roadway crossings, intersection improvements, small trail <br />additions, and bikeway network enhancements. <br />Moline stated that there were two new signals at Highway 42 and Dillon Road to which <br />C-DOT was contributing zero dollars and the state did not have funding to take care of <br />state roads. A robust transportation network is within the purview of the Planning <br />Commission to emphasize and prioritize. <br />Rice commented on the Highway 42/96t" Street issue, observing that 96t" was an entry <br />point for Louisville but it was a blighted area. There should be some priority given to that <br />project for the gateway reason so it could look the way we wanted it to for the <br />community. <br />Moline asked if Libhart ever saw that residents in mixed use and downtown residential <br />developments walked more. <br />Libhart replied that they had not looked at that in Louisville, but nationally in similar <br />communities with destinations and connectivity, there were significant increases in the <br />number of people who were using walking and biking. <br />Brauneis noted that he wanted all the projects and since the Commission could leave <br />worrying about the budget to the Council, he thought that the commissioners could feel <br />good about saying that they valued all the projects. <br />Williams noted that it was important to focus on multi -modal projects to get the biggest <br />bang for our buck and leverage the most funds. Another priority was to finish trail <br />connections for walking and biking. There were a lot in the city that were disjointed and <br />not completed and finishing those might be faster and cheaper than other projects. <br />Williams asked why you wouldn't pick scenario 3. <br />Rice stated that the Commission should endorse the report and that the policies, <br />projects, and programs were all appropriate and that the Commission could go further <br />and say that they support scenario 3. The reality of budgeting was a City Council <br />function. <br />11 <br />