My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
Planning Commission Agenda and Packet 2015 12 10
PORTAL
>
BOARDS COMMISSIONS COMMITTEES RECORDS (20.000)
>
PLANNING COMMISSION
>
2000-2019 Planning Commission
>
2015 Planning Commission Agendas Packets Minutes
>
Planning Commission Agenda and Packet 2015 12 10
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
3/11/2021 9:55:10 AM
Creation date
12/11/2015 8:30:37 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
City Council Records
Doc Type
Boards Commissions Committees Records
Supplemental fields
Test
PCPKT 2015 12 10
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
182
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
Planning Commission <br />Meeting Minutes <br />November 12, 2015 <br />Page 12 of 41 <br />Russell says I am not crazy about that alternative you pointed out. I am one of those people <br />who doesn't like that building. Can you compare the scale of this building to the scale of the <br />Fuzzy Antler in Koko Plaza? <br />Hartronft says the building on Front Street is a little over 35' and at the front wall, it goes up <br />pretty close to that at 32' or 33'. I think the gable goes up higher, about 36'. I can't remember. <br />There is more vertical surface wall. There is a two -story portion down on the west end, but on <br />the east end that is the three - story, a lot of the walls go up to 35'. <br />Russell asks Staff. I am thinking about the whole dialogue we had about the two -story versus <br />one -story up on McCaslin. Why do we care if it is three stories or two stories if it is 35', <br />recognizing there is a portion that pops up into 38'? It seems strange to me that we care about <br />stories when we are focused on building height. <br />Russ says I wasn't the author of the Handbook, but my interpretation of the Handbook is that it <br />is very clear. It suggests that all designs within the transition district should be compatible with <br />its neighbors. Putting a three -story building within a 35' height guarantees that you have maxed <br />the envelope and you have limited roof lines. If you do two stories, it allows design flexibility. We <br />are entertaining this exact same thought on So Boulder Road and lowering the heights allowed <br />on So Boulder Road from three to two stories. That changes parking dynamics.. It introduces far <br />more flexibility in design. I would argue that my interpretation of the code when you look at it is <br />having those two control features downtown when you're transitioning to a neighborhood district <br />makes sense to me from design detailing. The third floor guarantees that you are 35'. Two <br />stories does not. I believe the drawing that Eric showed is that is what the envelope will allows. <br />However, the Design Guidelines don't allow that. You would have to manipulate that to be a <br />better fit and transition to the neighborhood. Different from McCaslin, all the neighbors were <br />allowed the same height. Here in Downtown, you are not. It is a very specific design concern to <br />fit with your neighbors. Staff interprets the third floor as not allowing a building to be designed <br />creatively to fit with your neighbors. I think Scott did a good job of defining that within the Staff <br />Report. Chairman Pritchard, you asked us to go look at 931's PUD. The building in the back at <br />931 is not 30'. It is all to be 27'. <br />Pritchard asks Ha <br />proposal? Looking a <br />Hartronft say working <br />painted tr. <br />Can you clarify the materials that we would possibly see on the <br />drawings, they are slightly different than what was in the package. <br />ff and Ronda and Nancy, we did change the stone elements to <br />Public mment: <br />Janet Russell, 916 Main et, Louisville, CO 80027 <br />A little background about that I have been in business in Louisville for almost 20 years, <br />and at one time, running two businesses. I moved my business downtown with a lot of promise, <br />one being that Fast Tracks would be running, and that the three -story building to the north of me <br />would happen with underground parking, and that Conoco - Phillips would bring their <br />headquarters here. I came to downtown to bring my business because I thought there was a lot <br />of promise. The things that lured me to downtown did not happen. I was appreciative of Ronda <br />welcoming my business to downtown; however three months after that, I looked outside my <br />door and said "what did I do ?" At 5 o'clock, there are no businesses open. There were maybe <br />five restaurants and three were already bankrupt or for sale. I am Janet Russell and I brought <br />the Downtown Louisville Arts District here. I brought the First Friday Art Walk. We are doing <br />many beautiful things to the Downtown. I appreciate the DBA. I think they made a significant <br />impact on the Downtown. I am here to support what this proposal is about. I have made it my <br />lifetime investment here in downtown. I believe that Ronda has done so many good things for <br />the Downtown. One example of what this woman has done for me as a retailer is she moved to <br />the very back of the building where there are no windows because she wanted to bring <br />something to the Downtown that has good following. When it is time for me to expand, she had <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.