Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Traffic topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Traffic, turn‑lane timing and road funding dominated Bluebird debate
Summary
Citizens and staff questioned whether local and state road improvements assumed in traffic studies will be built before occupancy. The applicant offered to construct a left‑turn lane tied to certificates of occupancy; a state lawmaker's affidavit said the Watterson Trail widening is not currently funded.
Get email alerts on the Traffic topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Traffic, road capacity and the timing of off‑site improvements were focal points of the Bluebird Luxury Lofts hearing.
Traffic engineer Diane Zimmerman described trip‑generation methodology that draws on counts from comparable apartment complexes to produce AM and PM peak‑hour rates. The developer’s peer reviewer (Adam Kirk) agreed with the trip counts but disagreed on how trips would distribute across local streets, a difference that changed whether a left‑turn lane onto Bluebird from Watterson Trail was warranted. In response, the applicant agreed to design and construct a left‑turn lane, and proposed conditioning certificates of occupancy on completion of that lane.
Jeffersontown public works director Jimmy Franconia said the city is updating detention and drainage models and expressed concern about Bluebird Lane capacity; he asked for a 24‑foot roadway to support pedestrian safety near senior facilities. Brian Abrams submitted a notarized affidavit from State Representative John Hodgins stating that the previously anticipated Watterson Trail widening (project 5‑518.0) is not in the current highway budget and is unlikely to be funded for several years, weakening any assumption that a state‑led widening will be completed in the near term.
The council and speakers repeatedly asked whether the applicant’s mitigation measures — turn lane construction, frontage improvements, and over‑detention — could be required before occupancy to avoid placing additional traffic burden on existing narrow streets. The council’s denial indicates those infrastructure concerns were decisive in the adjudication.

