Planning Commission Minutes 2016 04 14

Home Browse Search

Planning Commission Meeting Minutes April 14, 2016 Page 7 of 19 get new utilities. I want to make sure we are not forgotten about when the utilities go in. I don't want the coffee shop and my tenant cut off. Robinson says the parking spots are included. There is a note on the plans that says "provide reserved parking signage for northwest building." Danna and I spoke earlier this week and we will insure they are able to get their utilities. The detail to be worked out is where the utilities will go. Moline says when I look at the plat, it is unclear to me that your property is not considered part of the rest of this. Can you discuss that? Hinz says we just own the building; we don't own the land around it. I'm a little owner. I am not financially involved with what they are doing. Robinson says the building exists on the land under the building. It is separate ownership and is not included in this proposal. Doug Harper, 1160 South Boulder Road, Louisville, CO I am the owner of Union Jack Liquor. I want to thank Bill and Wade because this development has been a long time coming. The field really needs some work. The one question I have is about the access from the building they will build on South Boulder Road. We have access to Cannon Circle and have had since the development of our building. Can I get some clarification if that access will be maintained on the east side? Robinson says the access is shown on the PUD connecting to the Union Jack property. There is a note that says "allow for access". Gordon Fordyce, Fordyce Auto Center, 1655 Cannon Circle, Louisville, CO I own Fordyce Auto Center. I spoke with the Fire Marshall about Cannon Circle and asked if it would be narrowed or maintain the same width. He said it would be the same width. Is it being narrowed? I want to ask about the truck -only access. At the last meeting, I asked about it and then we had another meeting away from the group. They assured me it was more token than legitimately "trucks only". After 26 years of traffic history, everybody will be breaking that violation. I asked who would monitor it, and they said it was the City's jurisdiction and criteria to monitor it. I am asking again if these are the same conditions. Will it be tongue and cheek? Is it there for the state's liability or an actual sign to keep cars off that site? Robinson says it will be signed Truck Access Only. We will not have the police sitting out there. We hope that people will obey traffic direction. We have worked with Public Works and CDOT and they are all comfortable with this. It is not the ideal solution but it is the best one we have right now. Brauneis asks Robinson to describe CDOT's perspective on it. What is it about this little sign that makes it legal? Robinson says CDOT's goal is generally to reduce the number of accesses on their highways (number of curb cuts). This is actually increasing it. Currently, Cannon Circle has one access, and the Trucks Only will increase it to two. To the extent possible, they want to limit the number of cars going in and out of the old access. They are comfortable with the sign and it will meet their standards. The goal of the sign is to encourage cars to use the signalized intersection instead of this access. Tengler asks if the sign is meant to be a suggestion as opposed to a restriction. Is it a ticket - able offense? Robinson says I don't know the details of traffic law, but it will be a traffic control sign. I don't know what the penalty would be for violating it. Pritchard says the curb cut is there and we are going to allow truck traffic. I understand your point because the Fordyce business has been there as long as I have lived in this community. How do you break a habit after 26 years? Are we setting ourselves up for an enforcement issue that is not our strong suit? Other than wanting to minimize car traffic, is there any reason to have it as a right -in and a right -out? Robinson says I think to get CDOT's blessing, we need the sign.