Laserfiche WebLink
Louisville City Council Meeting <br />October 3, 2000 <br />Page 6. <br /> <br />Wood reported that the landscaping coverage requirement of 25 percent is far exceeded <br />with over 35 percent landscape coverage. The minimum plant material requirement from <br />the IDDSG has been met or exceeded. <br /> <br />Wood reviewed the architecture of the building which is proposed to be constructed of <br />integrally colored split faced CMU. Accent banding is provided around windows and at <br />the top of the parapet. Flagstone accent panels are also used. The building is a <br />combination of one and two-stories and has extensive window glazing. The main entry is <br />highlighted with a sloped metal roof in a deep red color~ <br /> <br />Wood reviewed the proposal's lighting and signage. The parking lot lighting is provided <br />with 250-watt metal halide fixtures. The sidewalk in front of the building is illuminated <br />with low bollard lighting. The photometric plan complies with the IDDSG standards. A <br />flagstone monument sign is proposed at the main drive entry. No wall signs have been <br />requested. <br /> <br />Wood stated that the Planning Commission found the application to be in full compliance <br />with the Special Review Use criteria, with minor modifications. <br /> <br />Davidson called for Applicant presentation. <br /> <br />The applicant was not in attendance. Planning Director Wood stated that the proposal is <br />compliant and the only concern voiced was from Councilman Mayer. Wood noted that <br />Mayer's concern was the proposal's lack of evergreen trees. <br /> <br />COUNCIL QUESTIONS AND COMMENTS <br /> <br />Mayer voiced his concern with the landscaping plan's lack of evergreen trees. He <br />suggested that the issue be resolved with the applicant at the Planning Staff level. <br /> <br />Davidson suggested that Council consider granting a blanket SRU approval for office use <br />at CTC. <br /> <br />Mayer voiced concern with Davidson's suggestion. He noted his only concern would be <br />that offices generate a much higher level of parking and traffic. He would want to make <br />sure that proposed uses would not overtax the infrastructure. <br /> <br />Sisk concurred with Davidson's comment and stated that he would encourage that type of <br />approval. He favored the Planning Staff advising applicants. <br /> <br />6 <br /> <br /> <br />