Planning Commission Minutes 2015 07 09

Home Browse Search

Planning Commission Meeting Minutes July 9, 2015 Page 4 of 17 Commission Questions of Applicant: Moline asks what was the hardship case made to the BOA? Johnson says the driving force was being a unique lot and the historic home. Based on a hardship in terms of an unusual lot size and unusual topographic features, I do not believe their decision was based on any of those decisions. Public Comment: Peter Stewart, 1132 Jefferson Avenue, Louisville, CO I live a block and a half away from the subject property. I am not necessarily opposed to this but I am not super excited about it either. I am concerned about the loss of neighborhood character as a result of this proposed subdivision. Variation in lot size is really a principal characteristic of Old Town. It is what distinguishes Old Town from all the rest of the subdivisions in the City. As you know, there has been volumes of studies and research over the past 25 years that talk about the diversity needed in neighborhoods to make them work; the diversity of lot size, the diversity of house size, and those kinds of things. I think most of the conclusion is that diversity really brings greater livability and quality of life and a sense of place to a town and a neighborhood. As you know, the Old Town Overlay addressed a lot of issues in Old Town where there were a number of nonconforming lots with modifications, setbacks, and heights, and lot coverage. You will also note that they did not change the minimum lot size or minimum frontage properties. I think this is intentional to preserve the larger lots that are scattered around Old Town. I think this is somewhat of a unique lot but you could say that diversity is unique. There are probably 15 or 20 lots of this size with four -lot configuration. Another concern I have that is shared by the neighbors who wrote letters is the amount of building that can be built on the property. As Scott Robinson mentioned in the Staff presentation, there is a certain amount of lot coverage allowed and a certain amount of floor area allowed. This subdivision would bump up both of those numbers about 20%. It is significantly more than what is currently allowed. These are my thoughts and concerns and I hope you will find some way to mitigate the negative impacts that this might have on the neighborhood in Old Town. Christine Meecham, 1220 LaFarge Avenue, Louisville, CO I am a very new neighbor. I just purchased the home in January 2015 and just moved in in June. My daughter has lived in Louisville for a number of years and I have been looking off and on for probably five years to find the perfect grandma's house. I did find that on Lafarge. I would like to say is I am not really familiar with all the technicalities. I do love the character of the neighborhood, but if you come down the street, you will notice a big difference. On the west side of the street are newer homes with the exception of perhaps two. They seem to be a lot bigger lots. On our side of the street, the east side, I think my house was built in 1963 and it is about 1800 sf. Next to me is a barracks that was brought down from Wyoming, and then the lot in question. What I like about the neighborhood is it all seems to fit in and work very compatibly together. I moved from Salt Lake City and we had a neighborhood quite similar. Unfortunately, before they started doing planning, people were buying the homes much like I see happening in Louisville, tearing down the original structures or adding onto them, and building quite large structures that seemed to really unbalance the neighborhood. On our side of the street, it all looks very compatible in terms in size of the housing. I think this plan would continue to add to that. On the other side of the street are a lot of larger homes. It seems that work because they are on one side of the street versus the other. I would be in favor of this plan because it would continue with the compatibility and unique nature of the street on Lafarge. Summary and request by Staff and Applicant: Staff recommends approval.