My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
Planning Commission Minutes 2019 04 11
PORTAL
>
BOARDS COMMISSIONS COMMITTEES RECORDS (20.000)
>
PLANNING COMMISSION
>
2000-2019 Planning Commission
>
2019 Planning Commission Agendas Packets Minutes
>
Planning Commission Minutes 2019 04 11
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
7/9/2020 1:17:24 PM
Creation date
7/9/2020 10:58:26 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
City Council Records
Meeting Date
4/11/2019
Doc Type
Boards Commissions Committees Records
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
10
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 />April 11, 2019 <br />Page 8 of 10 <br />Hoefner suggested making it explicit in the language that the City wanted to encourage <br />creativity and innovation around signs in the PUD process. General agreement from the <br />Commission. <br />Zuccaro noted that there was aspirational language in the Downtown Sign Guide and <br />thought that adding that kind of language to the new manual was a good idea. <br />Ritchie stated that the adoption of the sign code was tentatively on the June agenda <br />and she encouraged the commissioners to reach out to staff with their observations <br />over the coming months. <br />2019 Planning Commission Work Plan <br />Brauneis noted that some commissioners had requested this discussion. <br />Zuccaro referred the commissioners to three documents to guide their discussion of the <br />Commission's 2019 work plan: The Strategic Planning Framework, City Program Goals <br />and Objectives, and the City of Louisville Comprehensive Plan. He noted that <br />takeaways from the Commission's work plan would be funneled into the Council's 2020 <br />work plan. He covered the goals from each of the three guiding documents and invited <br />the Commission to address the following discussion points: <br />• Study session on topics of interest and additional research from staff? <br />• Explore and propose zoning or subdivision ordinance amendments? <br />• Explore Comprehensive Plan Amendments? <br />• Other ideas beyond the proposed workload? <br />Rice found the prioritization of the various projects appropriate. <br />Howe wondered how to approach the redevelopment and economic prosperity issues <br />and if the Commission should be considering these issues on the scale of singular <br />projects, like the McCaslin redevelopment, or considering them more broadly across the <br />city? <br />Zuccaro replied that the Small Area Plans had been an opportunity to consider making <br />changes to encourage development desires in incorporating those into zoning. The <br />McCaslin study allowed the City to do market analysis in a way that they had not done <br />in the Small Area Plans and, as such, the McCaslin area study would be a case study <br />for those broader processes and considerations. <br />Howe asked who was responsible for pushing issues of economic development <br />currently. <br />Zuccaro replied that the City had a staff and a committee for economic development <br />and they were tasked with being the liaison between the business community and City <br />Council. If there were concerns that overlapped with zoning then the Planning <br />Commission should be involved in those discussions. <br />Howe wondered if there should be an additional box on the priorities list that addressed <br />economic prosperity beyond specific area studies. <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.