Planning Commission Minutes 2015 10 08

Home Browse Search

Planning Commission Meeting Minutes October 8, 2015 Page 12 of 23 provide to us to serve these buildings. We are excited about this 33 acres and the opportunity to continue our development activities in CTC and, particularly, in the City of Louisville. Commission Questions of Applicant: Moline asks why not wait until you have a tenant selected and then move forward with the plan? Vasbinder says they won't wait for us. The reason that we now have a lot of activity on 2000 Taylor is we can give them, within a reason, a certain date when that building is going to be available for them to move in. If, in fact, we held that off in this case and didn't have these two alternatives, and we had the 250,000 SF user from California, they won't wait. They won't let us go through that entitlement process and they always perceive that as a risk. We can't guarantee to them that we can provide a building that would satisfy their requirements. It is twofold. It is rather simple but when you boil it down, it really does occur. It is real world. We had that happen in a project in another part of the City where a company from Germany and looked at 12 different cities in the United States. They narrowed it down to two and we were able to present a building. The other state didn't have that building and so we were blessed and they came to our building. It is a little difficult when you do this and there are all these alternatives, and everybody asks what are you going to do. I think it narrows it but it still gives us that flexibility. Rice says that Staff has these five conditions. Do you accept those? Vasbinder says all five. Public Comment: Michael Menaker, 1827 W Choke Cherry Drive, Louisville, CO 80027 1 have rarely been more excited about a project than this one, but I am particularly struck at the innovative collaboration between Staff and Etkin Johnson. I have no concerns about lack of precedent. If we are making precedent today, it is a good one. You can go to a lot of these meetings in a lot of jurisdictions and not see Staff and an applicant work so collaboratively to ensure an outcome that is good for everybody, most especially the City of Louisville. If our Economic Director was here, he could speak for an hour and a half on the values of primary employment. We will stipulate for the record that it is a good thing for the City. But really struck me was that in a small town, who does these projects? It is Etkin Johnson who is known to us, who knows us, and has really never let us down. If there was ever a reason to make precedent, it would be to move forward with a partner that has danced well with us in the past. I really do believe that the applicant is the tipping point on this, and if you have any concerns about who we're doing with, you should allay those concerns. I urge you to enthusiastically endorse this and send it forward to Council where I will most certainly argue for increased signage. Summary and request by Staff and Applicant: Staff recommends Planning Commission move to approve Louisville Corporate Campus at CTC. Resolution 31, Series 2015, with the following conditions: 1. Staff requests the applicant redesign the monument signs to comply with the IDDSG in terms of height. The modification shall be reflected on the PUD prior to submittal to City Council. 2. The applicant shall provide an appraisal of the property to determine the 12% public land dedication amount at time of the drafting of the subdivision agreement. 3. Staff requests the applicant comply with the fire hydrant placement in Alternative 1, established by the Fire Marshall, prior to City Council submittal. 4. The applicant is required to provide a shared parking agreement for Lot 3 if Lot 3 develops an exclusive office use prior to issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy for a tenant finish. 5. The applicant must comply with the August 26, 2015 Public Works memo prior to recordation.