My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
City Council Minutes 2016 12 06
PORTAL
>
CITY COUNCIL RECORDS
>
MINUTES (45.090)
>
2016 City Council Minutes
>
City Council Minutes 2016 12 06
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
9/19/2022 3:13:39 PM
Creation date
12/21/2016 8:35:02 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
City Council Records
Doc Type
City Council Minutes
Original Hardcopy Storage
9C1
Supplemental fields
Test
CCMIN 2016 12 06
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
15
PDF
Show annotations
View images
View plain text
City Council <br />Meeting Minutes <br />December 6, 2016 <br />Page 4 of 15 <br />the large medians. A one -lane Centennial Parkway would serve the area well now and <br />at build out. <br />Mr. Sheets stated the types of buildings encouraged in the Small Area Plan don't lend <br />themselves to getting the types of tenants (tech companies) we are hoping to get. He <br />added Koelbel is willing to pay for the difference between regular paving and the <br />addition of these amenities and the reconfiguration. <br />Mayor Muckle asked if we are likely to see this area build out in 20 years. Mr. Sheets <br />stated no, the current layout doesn't promote the types of uses people want and what <br />developers are currently looking to build. Koelbel would like to develop office uses in the <br />area, but there are parcels on the north side adjacent to existing residential that would <br />be great for residential development and other parcels that might be good for a <br />corporate campus of some kind as well as other office uses. <br />Mr. Sheets added he would like the City to update the design guidelines in the area to <br />address heights and setbacks. <br />Mayor Muckle asked if the lane reduction would still serve the area at build out. Chris <br />Hopkins, traffic engineer, Kimley Horn, stated their analysis of the lane reduction shows <br />it still offers plenty of capacity for projected traffic volumes at build out. <br />Public Comment <br />Chris Haglin, 1068 Eagle Court, stated he has reservations about the Plan, specifically <br />the lack of transit oriented development adjacent to the Bus Rapid Transit along US 36. <br />The area needs first and final mile solutions and pedestrian access. A second issue is <br />housing. If the City is going to have housing anywhere in town it should be next to the <br />Bus Rapid Transit. This creates fewer vehicle trips and a greater use of the bus system. <br />It also won't impact schools greatly as it will be designed for singles and couples, not <br />families. Without including these items the only thing this Plan generates is traffic. <br />Council needs to look at the long term value of housing at the Transit -Oriented <br />Development/Bus Rapid Transit areas. <br />Sid Vinall, 544 Leader Circle, stated this has been a long process and it will be positive. <br />The McCaslin Boulevard area is the major retail area for the City and we hope this plan <br />will bring more businesses. The increased population growth and traffic is not going <br />away but Louisville has been able to control growth better than some of our neighbors <br />and keep our small town character. He supports the Plan as presented. <br />Audrey Debarros, 839 West Mulberry Street, stated she would like to see a vibrant, <br />mixed use, pedestrian -friendly area but it is clear the community is not ready for multi- <br />modal efforts and creativity in design. Land use decisions are being overrun by the <br />fiscal model. The fiscal model is important but should not be the only consideration. She <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
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).