My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
Planning Commission Minutes 2014 05 08
PORTAL
>
BOARDS COMMISSIONS COMMITTEES RECORDS (20.000)
>
PLANNING COMMISSION
>
2000-2019 Planning Commission
>
2014 Planning Commission Agendas Packets Minutes
>
Planning Commission Minutes 2014 05 08
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
3/11/2021 9:55:21 AM
Creation date
7/31/2014 10:42:19 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
City Council Records
Doc Type
Boards Commissions Committees Records
Supplemental fields
Test
PCMIN 2014 05 08
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
13
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
<br />Planning Commission <br />Meeting Minutes <br />May 8, 2014 <br />Page 7 of 13 <br /> <br />Rice asks if they can make arrangements for off-site for the storm water catch, then <br />they would go back and turn the right-of-way back into a community garden? Will this <br />happen after this project is complete? Is there any assurance that this will happen? <br />Russ answers that based on your approval, we have to assume it. As part of the Phase <br />2 approval, we can get assurance that this will happen. It is about the LRC establishing <br />a common detention facility. This site has to meet the storm water requirements and sit <br />on its own moving into the future. <br />Rice asks about the height issue and transition to the northern neighborhood. <br />Russ says historically, that in 2002, when the Fast Traks Rail Program was initiated by <br />RTD, the City had the perception that the Northwest Rail was coming to the District. <br />The City embarked on a several year effort of changing the industrial area that had a <br />concrete mixing plant, a lumberyard, and other under-performing properties. The City <br />embarked on a redevelopment plan that was approved in 2002-2004 and zoning came <br />in place. The vision established by City Council in early was approved and put <br />into the LMC. In 17.14 of the LMC, under the premise of being next to Highway 42 and <br />nearer to Downtown, there have been higher building heights in its design. Downtown <br />has allowed three stories within its heights. These standard heights match <br />heights. That is in the center of the core district which is from Pine Street to Griffith <br />Street. The core is more at South Street where the proposed underpass is going. The <br />transition from Old Town to the west or Little Italy to the north or Field to the <br />South, in 2002 when the City did the Master Planning, the City said they should start <br />taper down in height as you start to approach those neighborhoods. The residential <br />height standard in the City of Louisville is except in Old Town which includes <br />Field and Little Italy to the north. The Old Town overlay district which has a height <br />limit. Looking City wide, is the residential height standard except for Downtown Old <br />Town, but the Downtown standard is Working this together, they tried to taper it <br />down from to and then to in Little Italy. <br />Rice says then the concerns have been met by this design? <br />Russ says we meet the Zoning Code but there may be citizen questions with the <br />underlying code. The Code says From a character perspective, Staff needs to <br />review this from the adopted Code. <br /> <br />Rice asks about the SRU we are looking at. This speaks only to the change on Cannon <br />Street where the first floor retail is eliminated. Otherwise, there is no SRU aspect to <br />this? <br /> <br />Russ answers correct. <br /> <br />Brauneis asks about Historic Preservation Commission objections found in the packet. <br />Has anything changed since they issued their memo? <br />Russ answers no. Their plans were from an architectural perspective and what looks <br />and feel like Louisville and their interpretation of it. Nothing has changed in the plan. <br />There was a big gesture by the applicant in retaining a historic structure and moving it at <br />their cost. This location is not in the Historic Preservation District in terms of the Old <br />Town Overlay District. Regarding the funds used by the City so landowners can <br />voluntarily landmark, this building is not eligible. The applicant is taking on that cost. <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.