Laserfiche WebLink
<br />Kalish stated that we cannot ignore the imbalance we have between jobs and housing. She would <br />like to move forward with discussion on the Comprehensive Plan, specifically what parts to adopt. <br /> Kalish also stated that the Planning Commission needs to continue encouraging the City to look <br />at the overall planning for the City, so we don’t have more individual or spot planning. She also <br />wants to see more details on the GDP, there are significant areas missing. <br /> <br />McDermott stated he is impressed with the amount of planning that has already been done. He <br />believes that if the Comprehensive Plan does not need to be changed to accomplish their plan then <br />it should not be changed. He feels that the zoning is the bigger issue for consideration. After the <br />zoning is settled then it can be applied to the Comprehensive Plan. <br /> <br />Loo expressed that she would like to continue focusing on the Comprehensive Plan Amendment <br />first. <br /> <br />Lipton requested that Staff take the Commission through the Comprehensive Plan so the <br />Commission can have a better understanding of the implications related to the requested <br />amendments. He stated that the Commission needs to be provided a review on a zone-by-zone <br />basis of the GDP. He also requested the outlining of strengthens and weaknesses of the <br />agreement and the GDP. He suggested that the next meeting the regular meeting date set in <br />October. <br /> <br />McDermott questioned how that affects the Public Hearing process. <br /> <br />Lipton stated that it has no effect on the process and procedure because the Commission has kept <br />it as an open hearing with a motion to continue to a specific date. <br /> <br />Robson moved and Pritchard moved to continue the Public Hearing to the October 14 meeting. <br />Lipton called for a voice vote. All in favor. <br /> <br />Public Comment: <br /> <br />Lipton then asked for additional public comment, reminding each person to give name and <br />address and to limit their time to 3 minutes. <br /> <br />Sean Connellan, STK, made three points: 1) STK is looking at all the acres they own for the <br />development; 2) a reference has been made by a few people that Boulder County is interested in <br />purchasing the 80-acres and he clarified that the land is not sale; and 3) the South Sub-Area <br />Comprehensive Plan had been in the works for nine months but the process was stopped by the <br />City Council. <br /> <br />Jay Berger, 1016 Main St., Louisville expressed concern that the first attempt to amend the South <br />Sub-area Comprehensive Plan was being orchestrated by the Stakeholders only and that no <br />residents of Louisville were involved. The City needs to resolve the Comprehensive Plan <br />Amendments before moving forward. The City, not the applicant, needs to be holding open <br />house forum for the Comprehensive Plan. <br /> <br />Ty Gee, 253 Hoover Ct., Louisville stated that he can understand the frustration that perhaps we <br /> <br />11 <br /> <br />