Planning Commission Minutes 2012 10 25

Home Browse Search

Planning Commission Meeting Minutes October 25, 2012 Page 6 of 13 SRU –  1. The Purpose – Definition from Section 17.08.520 2. Criteria Review – reported all five (5) criteria had been met.  Criteria 1 - That the proposed use/development is consistent in all respects with the spirit and intent of the comprehensive plan and of this chapter, and that it would not be contrary to the general welfare and economic prosperity of the city or the immediate neighborhood; - Staff gave an overview of the comprehensive plan and it’s description of Opportunity Area #1. Policy statements were reviewed and staff concluded Criteria #1 had been met.  Criteria 2 That such use/development will lend economic stability, compatible with the character of any surrounding established areas; - Staff referenced the economic and fiscal study to summarize the impacts of the project and concluded Criteria #2 had been met.  Criteria 3 - That the use/development is adequate for the internal efficiency of the proposal, considering the functions of residents, recreation, public access, safety and such factors including storm drainage facilities, sewage and water facilities, grades, dust control and such other factors directly related to public health and convenience; - Staff gave an overview of the internal functionality of the site including the storm water system, public utility provisions, and internal circulation and concluded Criteria #3 had been met.  Criteria 4 - That external effects of the proposal are controlled, considering compatibility of land use; movement or congestion of traffic; services, including arrangement of signs and lighting devices as to prevent the occurrence of nuisances; landscaping and other similar features to prevent the littering or accumulation of trash, together with other factors deemed to affect public health, welfare, safety and convenience; - Staff gave an overview of the external impacts from the use including traffic and storm water functionality and concluded Criteria #4 had been met. Criteria 5 - That an adequate amount and proper location of pedestrian walks, malls  and landscaped spaces to prevent pedestrian use of vehicular ways and parking spaces and to separate pedestrian walks, malls and public transportation loading places from general vehicular circulation facilities; - Staff discussed the pedestrian facility upgrades including an 8 foot multi-use path on South Boudler Raod and a 5 foot sidewalk on Centennial Drive and concluded Criteria #5 had been met. Staff recommends approval of Resolution No. 21, Series 2012, a resolution recommending approval of a special review use (SRU) permit and a preliminary planned unit development (PUD) to permit the construction of five (5) buildings, three (3) of which will contain a total of 111 apartment units and structured parking, and two (2) of which will contain 33,500 SF of retail development, on Tract One of the Louisville North, Filing 7 Subdivision located at 707 E South Boulder Road with the following two conditions: 1. The applicant provides the City an updated shared parking agreement for the shopping center with all affected parties, prior to City Council. 2. The applicant create a shared parking management program that will ensure the residential portion of the parking can achieve a 2 spaces per unit ration between the hours of 8 pm and 8 am prior to Final PUD submittal. Commission Questions of Staff Lipton asked if there is a peak number of trips during specific AM and PM hours. McMillan stated the AM peak hours produce 67 trips in and 82 out, while the PM peak hours produce 232 in and 207 out. Lipton asked “what are the peak hours?”