Planning Commission Agenda and Packet 2015 10 08

Home Browse Search

Planning Commission Meeting Minutes September 10, 2015 Page 6 of 21 resolving it with BNSF. The site detailing will clarify what the access is and how it functions. At this time, Staff does not have enough information but we are making it clear that the applicant must resolve it prior to approval. Moline asks about Lot 4 which is part of the subdivision plat, but not part of the PUD proposal. Are there any other kinds of information that we would normally expect to see at a preliminary plat stage? There is little information about that parcel in the Staff report or the applicant's proposal. Are there access issues for Lot 4 that borders Highway 42? Lot 4's future plans are not being displayed at this preliminary plat. McCartney says there are existing uses there that will remain existing. Looking outside, it will look as it always has. The back property line is a little different than existing. Lot 4 access issues will not change at all. Russ says when you look at a plat, you look at the functionality of a lot and does it have public access and utility easements. Can it be serviced by public utilities? The PC has done plat approvals without PUD. O'Connell says we recently heard from BVSD regarding another DELO development about Louisville Elementary School (LES) reaching capacity within five years. BVSD said they were working on the solution already. Russ says the City Manager and I have been working with BVSD. They have a five year plan for Louisville Elementary that they provided to City Council, and it is going to the Board this fall. BVSD looks at what is approved. They did not include evaluation of what allowed. They monitor every year. The way the projections work in Old Town is unknown. They gave us two projections; one is a high growth assumption of students out of the established neighborhood of Old Town; and one is a low growth scenario. Three years ago, they gained 50 students. They used one projection based on that growth rate and it showed a significant over -capacity by 2019. They did a low growth scenario based on the traditional growth rates of Louisville. Since then, they lost 12 students two years ago and only gained back 9 unofficially this year. They are still not up to the level that they were two years ago. It is a guessing game on what Old Town does. They feel comfortable with the new developments. They have growth assumptions. They have bonding money set aside for LES over the next two years to deal with capacity issues. Russell asks about the design conditions. I do not recall ever seeing design conditions as detailed as these. Are we doing this because we are providing a deviation from some intended use? We want something vibrant and oriented toward the City. Russ says the nature of commercial in the Main Street environment is a walkable environment where they are engaged to the street. They want the doors to operate with the on -street parking. What we have seen in other communities such as Broomfield's Interlocken is they have actually turned their back on the street and internalize towards driveways and parking areas. These are the exact same conditions that we provided on all the DELO submittals. Russell asks if this requires a higher level of design up to the point of final submittal than would typically be required otherwise? McCartney says at final, regardless if we included these or not, there will be a high level of detail. Pritchard asks Russ that, as he continues his conversation with the City Manager and the school district, they need to be kept abreast to what has been improved and what entitlements. Russ says there is a point of contention between the City and BVSD on what is approved versus what is allowed and what we think should be in the plan. We are continually talking with them about the zoning that will yield students. The BVSD should take that into account and they haven't to date. They have only done what is approved. Every project is referred to the