Laserfiche WebLink
<br />City Council <br />Meeting Minutes <br />April 17, 2007 <br />Page 7 of 10 <br /> <br />Planning Area #2, located between the proposed north/south collector road and <br />the BNSF railroad tracks, is 2:2.95 acres in area. The land use in this planning <br />area would be primarily residemtial as well as those permitted uses under the <br />PCZD-Residential zoning cat1egory. The GDP provides for a total of 50 <br />residential units, which would yield a density of 2.18 dwellings per acre. <br /> <br />The Comprehensive Plan allocated between the two unincorporated enclaves, 60 <br />units to the Hamm Property (Takoda) and 22 units to the Alkonis Property. The <br />majority of the Alkonis Property is designated as commercial office and retail. <br />The request for 60 units on th,e proposed Takoda GDP is consistent with the <br />Comprehensive Plan. Planning Area #1 of the Takoda General Development <br />Plan reflects the proposed land uses as a mix of residential and commercial. <br />There is a density transfer note of the General Development Plan, which will be <br />brought forward at the second reading of the ordinance. <br /> <br />Economic & Planning Systems provided a summary of a fiscal analysis for the <br />32.4 acre parcel based on the! estimated number of residential units and <br />estimated commercial square footage shown on the proposed Takoda GDP. <br /> <br />The Planning Commission conducted a public hearing on February 8 and <br />forwarded a recommendation of support for the proposal. <br /> <br />Mayor Sisk stated the PowerPoint presentation would be incorporated into the <br />record and requested an Appllicant presentation. <br /> <br />Mr. Rick Brew, RMCS, LLC, introduced Josh Bertes, of Economic & Planning <br />Systems and Jason Margraf, 'from J3 Engineering Consultants. He addressed <br />the questions raised at the last meeting regarding egress and ingress to the <br />property. He explained they propose a three-quarter turn at Summit Drive, and a <br />signal light at Paschal and Hi!~hway 42. He addressed the concern the <br />properties located in the closE~ vicinity of the railroad tracks would be impacted. <br />He explained in addition to thle railway easement, they propose a 100 foot buffer <br />for public use, and are considering berms along the easement. <br /> <br />PUBLIC COMMENT <br /> <br />John Leary, 1116 LaFarge Avenue, Louisville, CO voiced his concern over the <br />zoning of the enclave properties. He addressed the commercial component <br />identified as commercial/retail/office and noted if this is changed or modification <br />on the proposal, there is a fixled level of expenses. He felt some of the cost <br />should be shifted. <br /> <br />COUNCIL COMMENT <br /> <br />Council member Muckle aske!d what was allocated for the east side of the <br />