Planning Commission Minutes 2016 02 11

Home Browse Search

Planning Commission Meeting Minutes February 11, 2016 Page 14 of 18 comes to traffic flow, we need to look at the 2035 data and see if we are making the right judgement calls. In regard to the signals, if it is warranted by CDOT, I will not argue with them. Robinson says that South Boulder Road is a local road, so it is entirely up to the City. If we adjust timing, we would work with CDOT since Highway 42 is their road. Pritchard says we also need to consider costs and make sure the development will help us pay for the additional lights if warranted. Regarding trail connectivity, who in this town is against that? Anything we can do to make these connections is beneficial. It needs to be incorporated into this plan. The issue with the school is an ongoing issue. I defer to BVSD because they are aware of what we are attempting to do. They say they can accommodate the student loads. As a city, we are aware of this. CC has complained to BVSD about this so it is an ongoing argument. Regarding open space, if the property comes up and we have the capacity to buy it, then great. If the property owner comes forward, I don't believe we should change the zoning but do as staff proposes and leave it. I would like to see the numbers and would feel more comfortable since we have gone this far. I think we should go the whole way and give something to CC that they can truly look at, and feel that CC has all the necessary information to move forward. Brauneis asks if Staff will have the cost analysis numbers before presentation at CC? Robinson says yes. We apologize that they were not ready tonight. We are working on them currently with Parks and Public Works. Staff should have them by the end of February. When we were doing tentative scheduling, we assumed two meetings with PC before CC presentation. We intend to have the numbers for the PC March meeting. Rice says can we roll this over until March meeting to approve the plan? Will that change the schedule? Robinson says yes. Tengler asks if these traffic studies are beginning to incorporate the potential for driverless cars? If you believe the more aggressive estimates, you could start seeing them in as few of 5 years. Within 20 years, you will certainly see an impact. Robinson says no. We have talked a little about it the design aspect. One of the advantages of this compartmentalized parking is that parking demand could decrease significantly because of automatic cars. It allows for the development of these parcels. We are not necessarily projecting or totally anticipating at this point. I can follow up with the traffic consultant. We want to keep the plan flexible so that changes or unforeseen changes can be accommodated. Pritchard says my impression is that the PC would like to continue this matter until March. Other issues such as the "yellow" lines that are difficult to see can be corrected. I want a clean plan going to CC. I would like to continue this matter to the March meeting. Motion made by Tengler to continue the South Boulder Road Small Area Plan, Series 2016, seconded by Rice. Motion passed by unanimous voice vote. ➢ Citywide Wayfinding Signs: A request to review a draft copy of the Citywide Wayfinding Sign package. • Staff Member: Sean McCartney, Principal Planner Staff Report of Facts and Issues: McCartney presented from Power Point: • Citywide Wayfinding Sign Plan. It is more subjective than technical. It was taken through the same type of process that the Small Area Plan went through. The signs were shown at most of the meetings such as Placemaking workshops and design process. • Arthouse Design is the sign subcontractor to Cunningham Group, overall facilitator for the Small Area Plan.