Planning Commission Minutes 2015 04 23

Home Browse Search

Planning Commission Meeting Minutes April 23, 2015 Page 10 of 23 me to fight because this is my home, this is my property, and I want to have the same rights every other citizen here in Louisville has including the five of you. You get the right to do what you want with your property. For five years plus the three years, I have been sitting here waiting for answers on this proposed realignment since it was addressed just briefly in the Comprehensive Plan by the Planning Department. This is eight years if I am lucky. The City has already told me that they can't purchase my property now, nor will they be able to for a long while. With this on the record, I can't do anything with it. I am literally hands tied and pushed into a corner. I am asking that if we don't have funding to do this now, that we put this on hold and move it from the record so I may move forward and do what I need to do with my property until said funding is available. That is at a minimum. In addition to this, I have to go on record to say, I know this has been a sweetheart suggestion from the City Planning Department. I don't necessarily see the value it is going to drive in terms of alleviating traffic concerns from the brief specific photos that have been shown today. We still have a railroad pass and we still have a light at the railroad pass. There are still two lights remaining. The cost to purchase, procure surveys to evaluate, and continue to study will be substantial for this particular project. For what gain? You will still have two lights. I would absolutely love an underpass, but it could be done at Main. The realignment could leave historical properties alone including the Tesone's if they want to preserve and make it an historical landmark. It could head north and realign with Centennial through office buildings that aren't well loved by the people living in them. I don't feel it is fair to look at a few homes and think that is an easier route. We are people. We are not businessmen. I think it is only fair to give us the right to fight and address what really needs to be addressed here. Aligning the cost with the benefits, and determining if there are any other benefits to the City, are more necessary with some level of cost. In the sessions I participated in, in the workshops, the meetings, the online polls (I wasn't involved in the survey), there wasn't a high push for realignment of Main. It was barely mentioned and only in the second workshop. Yes, everyone loves parks and everyone would love a gateway, and I do agree that if I am able to keep my house, I would work with the City on design alternatives. There won't be multiple homes on those properties. I do believe a gateway can still be established with the historical significance of a straight Main Street. I am just pleading right now with the Planning Commission to sideline this, and to remove it from the plans, until the City has the funding to move it forward so I can continue to live and do what I need to do with the property I own. Sherry Sommer, 910 S Palisade Court, Louisville, CO She has questions about the marginal cost model and looking for slack in different public services. She is happy to hear about coordination between open space, the rec center, and the library because that wasn't clear to her in other meetings if this was an integrated view of the City. She has a question about what the baseline is for acceptable uses for all those facilities. Is it an ideal model or is the model of what we're used to? Different communities have different standards. If you go to the Spruce pool or Scott Carpenter pool in Boulder, they are quite crowded. It is normal and the accepted use. If you go to Memory Square pool in Louisville, it is not as crowded and has a different vibe. What is the baseline and how do you determine slack and appropriate usage? Her other question is if you don't build additional roads, does that affect the marginal cost model? There is some wear and tear of additional use on existing infrastructure in the City. Is that put into the calculation? Robinson says in regard to wear and tear on present infrastructure, the marginal cost model does look at any additional maintenance costs from additional traffic. It breaks it out into new roads and maintenance. Regarding the existing level of service and how many people are using the parks, it is based on existing conditions and the budget. Every year, the budget will be "plugged" into the model and it will determine what the appropriate level of service is for the City for all public services according to Council. Those numbers can be adjusted since we know, for example, that the Rec Center is at capacity. The model allows us to do that.