Laserfiche WebLink
City Council <br /> Meeting Minutes <br /> June 5, 2012 <br /> Page 8 of 16 <br /> - superior to a vacant retail area <br /> - in favor of remanding back to Planning Commission <br /> Mayor Pro Tem Dalton thanked Council member Loo for saying some of things he <br /> wanted to say. He had the following thoughts: <br /> - re-zoning versus SRU and didn't feel the SRU allowed the developer to "slip this <br /> through" as had been alleged <br /> - apartment living was not incompatible with the neighborhood <br /> - infill development needed examination and how it would affect staffing and the general <br /> fund; this project does not cause alarm <br /> - the retail residents seem to want in this area is not likely to locate here <br /> - suggested a slightly less dense development and had already expressed concern <br /> about parking <br /> - not wise to leave an area sitting vacant <br /> Council member Yarnell wanted to echo the thanks to all parties involved. Her thoughts <br /> were: <br /> - agreed development was needed at this site but did not like the scale and felt it <br /> disagreed with the community vision <br /> - didn't want a development not in the character of Louisville just to fill this space but <br /> wanted a decision all of Louisville could be happy with <br /> - listening to the community, had not heard an outcry for high-end luxury rental units but <br /> for affordable housing <br /> - could not see this project going forward without significant changes <br /> Council member Keany asked if the height variances were architectural not structural. <br /> Mr. Mulhern stated 37 feet 5 inches was structural but they were asking for 42 feet for <br /> architectural features and elevator overrun. <br /> Council member Sackett couldn't find any instances where City Council overturned a <br /> Planning Commission decision. He felt the applicant had not made a case for <br /> overturning their decision. He thought the vast majority in Louisville would not want this <br /> project in their neighborhood and since he was elected by the people he would support <br /> them. <br /> Mayor Muckle thanked everyone who had worked on this difficult issue. He shared his <br /> thoughts on the project: <br /> - uncomfortable with the sacrifice of retail space in this economy in an area which used <br /> to provide fiscal health <br /> - not opposed to the concept of redevelopment but wanted to continue to pursue retail <br /> - the community needed to approach redevelopment in a comprehensive way <br /> - wasn't convinced this was compatible with the neighborhood <br /> - not convinced the developer could come back with a use that could be agreed upon <br /> - didn't feel this was consistent with the Comprehensive Plan <br /> - wasn't sure it was consistent with the fiscal model and thought the fiscal model might <br /> need to be revisited for future considerations <br />