Planning Commission Minutes 2019 03 14

Home Browse Search

Planning Commission Meeting Minutes March 14, 2019 Page 3 of 7 Vaisala PUD Amendment and Replat: A request for a replat to adjust the lot line between Lots 3 and 4. The Business Center at CTC Replat B and a PUD Amendment to allow the construction of a 40,000 sf building, additional parking and associated parking and associated site improvements (Resolution 6, Series 2019). • Applicant: Oz Architecture • Case Planner: Lisa Ritchie, Senior Planner Required public notice was met. Ritchie reminded the Commission that they had seen an application for Vaisala recently. The plat application proposes to adjust the lot line to accommodate the altered building design. The PUD amendment included the same architectural style and a similar lot layout from the previous application, but the new building was shifted north from the previous location. Some of the site design had changed, including the addition of a covered bike shelter. The applicant requested a deferral for 102 parking spaces, but the City may require at any time that the remaining parking lots be constructed. This application includes a landscape waiver due to the new configuration of the lot line for one of the structures, while the other lot exceeds the landscaping requirements. Staff recommended approving this waiver since the lot to the north will exceed the landscape requirement and there is language requiring that the two lots cannot have less than 25% landscape coverage collectively. Ritchie noted that the application meets the standards in the IDDSG and has metal elements but staff finds that the use of metal is acceptable in this case since the design result will appear as wood with metal accents. Staff recommends approval of Resolution 6, Series 2019, with two conditions: • Prior to City Council, the applicant shall revise the plans to relocate the fire hydrant as requested by the Louisville Fire Department. • Prior to the City Council hearing, the applicant shall revise the plat to establish new easements by plat, rather than by separate instrument. Moline asked about the current landscape coverage on Lot 3. Ritchie responded that the previous PUD had met the 25% coverage since the lot line had been slightly higher whereas now the lot was mostly parking lot. Hoefner asked why they were proposing to put the lot line back if they had vacated it last time. Ritchie replied that the applicant wanted to retain the options afforded by having two lots in the future. Williams asked if the two buildings could be occupied by separate businesses and property owners and asked if that would change the landscape waiver. Ritchie confirmed that they could be owned by different businesses and property owners, but that the landscape waiver would be attached to the property, not the property owner.