City Council Minutes 1997 12 16 - Laserfiche WebLink

Metadata

Thumbnails

Annotations

requirement. Council's request to add additional masonry had been included. Three areas of variance to the Campus Design Guidelines were being requested. The roofing material as asphalt in lieu of metal, setback variances are being requested, as well as a variance to the fence-height. The school district had imposed a setback of 150' to create additional separation between the school facility and Lot 1 development. There was a 30' setback required from Campus Drive and they had a 20' setback in place. Along the north property line there is a requirement of 20' and they were within 8' of the north property line. Fence height is restricted to 5' in the Louisville Design Guidelines and they proposed 8'. In order to minimize the overall stockade effect of this fence, there will be open lattice provided at the top of the fence and brick columns to break it up. Looking from the outside, berming up to the fence will show an outside elevation of only 6'. On September 9, 1997, Planning Commission approved this request with thirteen conditions. The PUD has addressed all conditions, with exception of a shared parking agreement. There were two conditions added by staff. There was some dispute between Lots 1 and 2 in terms of how the joint access would align with the current property line. Attachments provided indicate the proposed access into Lot 1. This access point did not align with the approved PUD access point. The two property owners addressed this problem by the creation of a cross-access easement. This would reflect the agreed upon alignment reflected in attachment one. The cross-access easement is critical for fire access. The City, in review through the City Attorney's office, asked that we become third party beneficiaries in further defining and clarifying the cross-access agreement to insure emergency vehicle access is provided. Emergency vehicle access was not deeded on Lot 1 of the Louisville Campus subdivision plat. The City asked the applicant to convey emergency vehicle access by adding a note to the PUD granting emergency access across Lot 1 to the benefit of Lot 2. All primary issues to the PUD had been met. Wood had a letter dated December 16, 1997, from Don Orr, Boulder Valley School District indicating their willingness to enter into a cross-parking agreement with Lot 1 to provide and share the Monarch K-8 parking area with Lot 1, as needed. He also had a letter from the property owner of Lot 2 that recognized that if this cross-access agreement was approved, it would impact their approved PUD. The applicants agreed to come back for an administrative amendment to their PUD. Dick Taft, 910 16th Street, Denver, Colorado, was there to answer questions. Davidson asked for Council questions and comments. Mayer questioned the notation indicating the landscaping design met county guidelines when the facility is located within the city limits of Louisville. Taft apologized for the error and agreed to correct the note. Mayer questioned the benefit for the City in providing variance to the setback requirements. Taft stated the primary reason for requesting the variance was due to the facility's use. The facility would provide its residents significant benefits due to its close proximity to the hospital and provide inter- generational programs for the students and facility residents. Dick Taft stated a recent development in the treatment of Alzheimer's patients involves patient interaction with children. It appears to significantly improve their ability to focus the mind. The benefit to the City would be the ability to 4