My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
Planning Commission Minutes 2011 03 10
PORTAL
>
BOARDS COMMISSIONS COMMITTEES RECORDS (20.000)
>
PLANNING COMMISSION
>
2000-2019 Planning Commission
>
2011 Planning Commission Agendas Packets Minutes
>
Planning Commission Minutes 2011 03 10
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
3/11/2021 9:55:19 AM
Creation date
8/16/2011 2:11:49 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
City Council Records
Doc Type
Boards Commissions Committees Records
Supplemental fields
Test
PCMIN 2011 03 10
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
6
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 />March 10, 2011 <br />Page 5 of 6 <br /> <br />Russell stated the Administrative Amended appears to have been a significant <br />amended to have been done administratively. <br />McMillan stated the Planning Director at the time supported the administrative <br />amendment so staff was willing to work with the applicant at the time. <br />Brauneis asked what a trail might look like as outlined in the parking and <br />pedestrian action plan. <br />McMillan stated the design would include an off-street bike path which would <br />create right-of-way and lot line changes. <br />Applicant Presentation: <br />Arlin Lehman, 680 Johnson St. stated the three (3) year date extension is driven <br />by the current banking environment. He stated he would answer any questions <br />the commissioners might have regarding the date extension. <br />Commission questions of Applicant: <br />Russell asked if Lehman would consider reinstating the residential component. <br />Lehman stated financing of the project would be the driving force behind either <br />the inclusion or the exclusion of the residential component. Right now the market <br />is very fluid for residential. <br />Sheets asked for a clarification as to whether the project has any residential units <br />at this time. <br />Lehman stated the project did not have any residential units. <br />Public Comment: <br />None heard. <br />Summary Comments and Request from Staff and/or Applicant <br />None heard. <br />Closed Public Hearing – Planning Commission Discussion <br />Brauneis asked for a clarification of the reasoning behind the three (3) year date <br />extension. <br />Lipton stated the date extension option was established and permitted through <br />the Louisville Municipal Code. The request is coming from the applicant because <br />of the financing market available to them at this time. <br />O’Connell stated her support of the request and wished the applicant well for <br />future financing. <br />Russell, Loo, Lipton, Pritchard and Brauneis stated their support for the three (3) <br />year extension. <br />Sheets stated she would like to see the request for a maximum of two (2) years <br />and not the three (3). <br /> <br /> <br /> <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.