Planning Commission Minutes 2016 02 11

Home Browse Search

Planning Commission Meeting Minutes February 11, 2016 Page 12 of 18 Brauneis says typically the PC hears those numbers so it is a missing part of the equation for all of us. My hunch is the cost numbers, especially given in ranges and knowing they are pushed out possibly 20 years, are what we are focused on in the plan. We probably differ on how uncomfortable we are without having those numbers at this point in time. Hsu says then I'd like to see the costs at the next meeting and a breakdown of them. Tengler says I too am impressed with the overall plan. I think Staff did a great job incorporating a lot of the public feedback that has happened over the last year and a half. There were a lot of very relevant and great points made in the public comments. I think John Leary's point was good and realize that the drawings are very speculative in showing what could happen. When I looked at the King Soopers proposed drawing, I thought "where do the cars go"? As much as I am in favor of more walkability and a safer environment, the King Soopers parking lot and the old Safeway parking lot are/were hazardous. They are tough to navigate as a pedestrian. I like the thought, but I question how feasible it is. Regarding the comments on the school enrollment, Alex, I wish we had better tools at our disposal. Maybe we build that in from the standpoint of passing whatever vote we put along to CC with the recommendation that they strongly consider it. It is not in our purview to make it a condition but we can certainly give some guidance to CC in terms of what we think. Again, I am sympathetic to your point of view and wish we had some stronger tools. As to the specific questions from Staff, my inclination is to turn the Santilli property into open space. It doesn't seem like a great spot for commercial stuck between the agriculture there now and the residential on the Lafayette side. Let's add it to the buffer we have. As to the traffic light at Cannon, my sense is that it will add a little bit of delay to the northbound traffic at certain points in the day, specifically at the evening rush hour. By and large, it is a safety issue and it seems to be a relatively minor inconvenience for anybody turning in there or making a right hand turn out of there. It will provide better access for future residents in that area. I am with Commissioner Hsu in terms of the financial analysis. I would like to see more "fine" prioritization rather than 1 to 5 or 6 to 10. There are bunch of things in 1 to 5, so is there a way we can characterize that in terms of fiscal impact as well as the priority within that? I realize it is a heavy ask at this stage. Is it feasible to do a 1, 2, and 3? Robinson says yes, we can look at the top priorities. It always comes down to getting funding from CC. The dates and years are intended to be guides for when they go into the CIP requests. If there are things you want to see moved up, let us know. If you think there are things that are priorities, we can try to highlight those. We can look at breaking 1 to 5 into a finer grain. Tengler says, specifically to the question I asked previously about where those big chunks of capital occur, is it feasible to also look and see where the big bumps would be based on the current prioritization? Robinson says yes. Rice says I want to express a concern I have about this plan, and then also reflect on some of the discussion we have had tonight. Echoing what others have said, overall I think it is an excellent plan and is very well done. I think the process we have gone through to develop this plan has been a really good one in terms of trying to get the community involved in the discussion as opposed to the Planning Department coming up with a proposal for all of this. I am impressed with that. First my concern is not having the economic issues fully on the table before us. One of the key components of this plan is the public improvements being suggested. We are not saying we are going to do these things. We are saying, if we can build a plan, these are the kinds of things we'd like to do. For example, and it has been stated by more than one person tonight, one of the key issues the public has expressed is the connectivity across South Boulder Road. To me, looming large is the ability to develop the underpass at Cottonwood Park. To me, if we are going to pass a plan down the line, we ought to know the dollars and cents associated with it. I myself would be in favor of deferring this discussion to approve the plan until we have those numbers. If that is not possible, I would say that CC is the next step in the line. We need to know in terms of planning what it is we are proposing and how much it will cost the community. We then need to know how that plays into the fiscal impact we see from development in this area. This plan does not add to the density and that is a very important