My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
Planning Commission Agenda and Packet 2020 08 13
PORTAL
>
BOARDS COMMISSIONS COMMITTEES RECORDS (20.000)
>
PLANNING COMMISSION
>
2020 Planning Commission Agendas Packets Minutes
>
Planning Commission Agenda and Packet 2020 08 13
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
8/13/2020 11:35:41 AM
Creation date
8/13/2020 8:25:23 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
City Council Records
Meeting Date
8/13/2020
Doc Type
Boards Commissions Committees Records
Jump to thumbnail
< previous set
next set >
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
253
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
Show annotations
View images
View plain text
Planning Commission <br />Meeting Minutes <br />June 25, 2020 <br />Page 7 of 24 <br />its capacity in the near future though. There have been discussion to have additional <br />lanes along the Northwest Parkway but it will need some major reconstruction at some <br />point of time. <br />Zuccaro shows a graph for trip distribution within the city. He says that most of the <br />traffic is assumed to come off Highway 36. <br />Moline asks that based on that graph, that is a total of 60% that does not come further <br />into Louisville. <br />Zuccaro says yes, that is the assumption. <br />Fulmer agrees and says that that is correct. Given the fact that there is a larger <br />employer and more retail activity, there will be a lot more trips to and from on Highway <br />36. One of the benefits of this project though is that it is right along this highway so most <br />of those trips will be affecting the Northwest Parkway and this highway. <br />Moline asks if this traffic graph takes into account visits that would originate from the <br />project site and an individual travelling to either McCaslin Blvd or downtown. Is that <br />captured in these numbers as well? <br />Fulmer says yes, that is also captured. <br />Diehl says that obviously the city has invested in doing their own fiscal analysis study. <br />Is there a precedent for the city to get a second opinion from the applicant's traffic <br />study? <br />Zuccaro says that typically what a city will do and what we have chosen to do is hire a <br />third party engineer to review the traffic study and also have our in-house engineer <br />review it as well. Our city engineering staff and engineer consultant found that the <br />applicant's traffic study is professionally done and is a reliable source and because of <br />that, the city did not find it necessary to conduct our own traffic study. <br />Moline asks that as far as improvements to the Highway 36 interchange, does the city <br />have any particular role in pushing that forward? <br />Zuccaro says that from a jurisdictional standpoint, we would collaborate and be <br />involved but on a project of this scale, we are coordinating with all other jurisdictions <br />and have some concurrence on what those improvements look like. It is technically <br />outside of the city's jurisdiction though. <br />Howe asks if the extension of Campus Drive be done independently of this project. <br />Zuccaro says that he would not say that without this project you could not do it. If there <br />was an acquisition of the right of way and funding, it could be possible. From the city's <br />standpoint though, when this issue has been brought up, the city prefers the extension <br />to coincide when a development has been approved for this property. <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.