Laserfiche WebLink
APPROVED – MARCH 10, 2005 <br />Commission voted unanimously to continue the public hearing to the January 27 <br />public hearing. <br /> <br />Staff continued with a review of the new information that addressed the above nine items in <br />relation to the following topics: <br /> <br /> <br />Site Plan <br /> <br /> <br />Internal Traffic Circulation <br /> <br /> <br />External Traffic Circulation <br /> <br /> <br />Parking Requirements <br /> <br /> <br />Grading / Detention / Floodplain <br /> <br /> <br />Architecture <br /> <br /> <br />Lighting <br /> <br /> <br />SRU Criteria <br /> <br />Staff concluded with a request to approve the project with the following condition: The City of <br />Louisville will deposit money in the Downtown Parking Improvement fund as part of this project <br />in an amount of $3,600 multiplied by the parking space deficit. <br /> <br />Commission Questions: <br />Kalish requested clarification of the height ordinance, standard parking space width, and FAR. <br />Staff discussed the details of the height ordinance and the FAR Ordinance. Staff explained the <br />standard parking space as 9’ x 19’ and that 8’9” would still be considered within the standard <br />dimension. <br /> <br />Loo requested information about the handicapped parking space: the number required and why <br />none had been located in the parking structure. <br />Staff requested that the applicant address those questions during their presentation. <br /> <br />McDermott continued with a discussion of the handicapped parking spaces and the <br />recommending distance from the structure. <br />Staff requested that the applicant address his concerns in their presentation. <br /> <br />Lipton asked for a clarification as to why this required a review of SRU. <br />Staff explained that all public facilities require the SRU review process. <br /> <br />McDermott asked for more details of the signage plan. <br />Staff used the site plan to clarify the signage plan. <br /> <br />Lipton requested that more detail of the signage plan be included in the plans prior to being <br />submitted to City Council. <br /> <br />Loo stated that signage to the below grade parking be more visible. She expressed a concern that <br />the area is identified inadequately. <br /> <br />Applicant Presentation: <br />3 <br /> <br /> <br />