My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
City Council Minutes 2009 03 10 Joint Meeting
PORTAL
>
CITY COUNCIL RECORDS
>
MINUTES (45.090)
>
2009 City Council Minutes
>
City Council Minutes 2009 03 10 Joint Meeting
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
3/11/2021 2:58:21 PM
Creation date
7/8/2009 8:07:29 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
City Council Records
Also Known As (aka)
Revitalization Commission Special Joint Meeting Minutes
Doc Type
City Council Minutes
Signed Date
3/10/2009
Original Hardcopy Storage
7D4
Supplemental fields
Test
RCMIN 2009 03 10 SP Joint Meeting
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
7
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
<br />City Council/LRC <br />Special Meeting Minutes <br />March 10,2009 <br />Page 4 of 7 <br /> <br />Mayor Pro T em Marsella voiced her concern over Option 2a and stated it lacked <br />a sufficient number of parking spaces. She felt Option 2b was a better <br />compromise and provided 400 parking spaces. <br /> <br />Councilor Muckle supported more close-in parking and suggested a Planning <br />Commission review of the options. <br /> <br />PUBLIC COMMENT <br /> <br />Kyle Callahan, Louisville, CO resident in the revitalization area supported Option <br />2a. He supported mixed-use structures and the pedestrian underpass. <br /> <br />John Leary, 1116 LaFarge Avenue, Louisville, CO also reported on walking the <br />area and stated it took approximately six minutes. He felt the station design and <br />framework plan should be reviewed by the Planning Commission. <br /> <br />Jim Garcia, a City of Lafayette resident, who owns property in Louisville, CO, <br />asked if the underpass would be impacted by the water drainage. He favored <br />parking on both the east and west side of the railroad tracks. Mr. Quinn noted <br />RTD is working with the Army Corp of Engineers on the drainage. <br /> <br />Rhonda Grassi, Downtown Louisville Business Owner, asked why Option 3, <br />which was recommended in the EIS Study, is not being considered. She <br />opposed retail development east of the railroad and underpasses. She favored <br />an overpass and felt it would bring people to the downtown area. <br /> <br />Eric Jasiak, Louisville, CO addressed Option 2a, and requested a second traffic <br />light to alleviate traffic congestion. <br /> <br />A Fed Ex driver who delivers in the City, suggested an overpass, to alleviate <br />traffic congestion. He felt the traffic at rush hour would be further impacted. <br /> <br />Planning Director Wood stated the City has worked on this project since 2000 <br />and noted the rail station location was selected based upon review criteria which <br />maximized connectivity to Downtown Louisville and minimized impact to existing <br />neighborhoods and businesses. He stated the framework plan does not intend to <br />impact the residential areas and the less property required by RTD, the better. <br />He noted the Framework Plan for the Revitalization Area was adopted by both <br />the Planning Commission and the City Council. He addressed the discussion <br />relative to a second traffic light and explained Highway 42 is a state highway and <br />only one traffic light is eligible between South Boulder Road and Pine Street. <br /> <br />Councilor Yarnell favored the station and parking plan outlined in the Framework <br />Plan. Mr. Quinn explained the goal is to preserve the residential neighborhoods, <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.