My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
Planning Commission Minutes 2015 01 08
PORTAL
>
BOARDS COMMISSIONS COMMITTEES RECORDS (20.000)
>
PLANNING COMMISSION
>
2000-2019 Planning Commission
>
2015 Planning Commission Agendas Packets Minutes
>
Planning Commission Minutes 2015 01 08
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
7/9/2020 1:23:50 PM
Creation date
7/9/2020 11:19:36 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
City Council Records
Meeting Date
1/8/2015
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.
/
23
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 />January 8, 2015 <br />Page 20 of 23 <br />Russ answers that on December 5, 2014, the Business Retention and Development Committee <br />(BRAD) which is a subcommittee of City Council with three elected officials and is a posted City <br />Council meeting, sponsored a developers forum. It was posted and put out. The question was <br />asked from the business and commercial side to get their perspective. <br />Robinson says the notes in the packet were from stakeholder interviews held in December <br />2013. The notes from the December 2014 meeting were not posted in the packet. The minutes <br />will be in the next BRAD packet. <br />Vinall asks how citizens can access these notes? <br />Robinson says the BRAD December 2014 minutes will be in the January 2015 BRAD packet. <br />Pritchard asks if they are on the website now? <br />Menaker says the summary from the recent BRAD meeting held Monday, January 5, 2015 <br />includes the summary from December 2014. The summary is found on the City website. <br />Menaker will show Vinall the link. <br />Vinall continues with his statement. A couple years ago, the PC was dealing with the plans for <br />the redevelopment of the Safeway site. The developer wanted to build approximately 200 <br />apartment units, filling up almost half of the site. It was by Special Review Use and had to be <br />rezoned. At that time, a large number of residents turned out for both PC and City Council <br />meetings to object to the plans. There were long and hard discussions. That project was <br />turned down by City Council but later a new plan was proposed which included a grocery store <br />and 8000 SF of commercial space and the apartment units were reduced from 200 down to 110. <br />Currently, we see the Alfalfa's store and new commercial space with businesses in place. <br />Tonight, the PC is looking at the Small Area Plan which to him is a large area plan. It extends <br />from Via Appia to the Lafayette border. He does not know if the PC will see a large amount of <br />residents turning out similar to several years ago, but he thinks the City is doing a better job of <br />advertising this type of project. He sees more signs around town giving notice to the citizens <br />about meetings. There are also emails coming from the Planning Department notifying people. <br />It was encouraging to see a large number of citizens attend the kick-off meeting in October 2014 <br />and at that time, there were a number of comments which we have heard in the summary by <br />Jean Morgan. Hopefully, the City-wide survey for the South Boulder Road Small Area Plan <br />which was sent out last month will provide more information and feedback for both the PC and <br />City Council. In regard to the survey, he thinks it was very helpful and if the right questions are <br />asked, as one who received and filled out the survey, he felt more accurate information could <br />have been obtained with better worded and more direct questions. He was dismayed <br />particularly with the picture section which already assumed that citizens had wanted to see high <br />density development along the South Boulder corridor. All you had to do was to choose which <br />form you wanted these developments; two or three stories or 5' back from South Boulder Road, <br />10' back, or 15' back, or a parking area. For him, it was like being asked to choose the least <br />worst option. As of now on South Boulder Road, from Table Mesa to the Lafayette line, there is <br />no stretch of road where there is any high density, two or three story developments 10' from the <br />road. It is a beautiful tree -lined corridor and it is a pleasure to drive from Boulder and come into <br />Louisville. He knows some members of the PC were at the kick-off meeting which he attends, <br />and it appeared apparent to him that there did not seem to be much interest in having more <br />high -density, in your face development along this corridor, particularly because of all the new <br />development at Steel Ranch, North End, the 110 units next to Alfalfas, the DELO project, <br />Highway 42 developments. What he thinks occurred at the kick-off was the input centered <br />around making the corridor more bike and pedestrian friendly, safer crosswalks, and possibly an <br />underpass near Main Street, upgrading and making more attractive the present shopping <br />centers, improving the traffic flow and keeping the tree -lined corridor as is. The question then <br />seems to be, how much development is too much, and what is the right development. We are <br />not alone in this. Many residents in Boulder have been highly vocal about these issues and <br />critical of how the planning process works. Even in the people in Superior and Erie are raising <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.