My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
Planning Commission Minutes 2016 07 14
PORTAL
>
BOARDS COMMISSIONS COMMITTEES RECORDS (20.000)
>
PLANNING COMMISSION
>
2000-2019 Planning Commission
>
2016 Planning Commission Agendas Packets Minutes
>
Planning Commission Minutes 2016 07 14
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
7/9/2020 1:31:12 PM
Creation date
7/9/2020 11:37:53 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
City Council Records
Meeting Date
6/14/2016
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.
/
33
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 />July 14, 2016 <br />Page 24 of 33 <br />push this forward, give it back to the developer, and ask that they reconsider based on some of <br />the feedback from the neighbors. I put it back to the four of you and ask your thoughts on that. <br />Rice says with regard to the suggestion of a continuance, it would not allow the other two <br />Commissioners to participate. We'd have to have a new hearing because they aren't here. It <br />doesn't expand the base of the Commissioners who could continue it. I think we should make a <br />motion and have a vote this evening. I would make a motion, but I know I don't have a second. <br />am having some trouble coming up with language for the condition with regard to the <br />landscaping. <br />Zuccaro says I would say that even the way it is written now, the expectation is that they would <br />work with Staff which includes the City Forester and the City's Landscape Architect. Simply <br />adding that for clarification to the motion would be fine. We have struggled with that concept of <br />what a "mature tree" is, trying to balance survivability, and having a thriving tree versus what <br />mature is. We are trying to rely on their landscape expert and the City's landscape expert. <br />Having that collaboration specified in the motion would be the most appropriate way. <br />Rice says the way the condition is now written, it speaks to the incorporation of new mature <br />trees. I think what we are looking for is that and, in addition, working to preserve what is there. <br />Hsu says it seems that if we are leaning toward a "no" vote, I am not certain why we need to <br />worry about the condition. <br />Rice says if I am making a motion, I want one that I will vote for. <br />Motion made by Hsu to approve Balfour Senior Living Plat/PUD Amendment: Resolution <br />14, Series 2016. A resolution recommending approval of a Planned Unit Development (PUD) <br />and final plat to allow for a 54-unit assisted living community on Lots 2 and 3 of Louisville Plaza <br />Filing 2. , with the following condition: <br />1. Prior to the City Council hearing, the applicant shall incorporate a minimum of six mature <br />trees into the overall landscape plan on the east and northeast side of the site. The <br />trees will be a mix of deciduous and evergreen trees which will provide a mature <br />landscape buffer and appropriate transition to the surrounding public open space and <br />single family residential neighborhood. <br />No second. Resolution dies. <br />Motion made by Rice to approve Balfour Senior Living Plat/PUD Amendment: Resolution <br />14, Series 2016. A resolution recommending approval of a Planned Unit Development (PUD) <br />and final plat to allow for a 54-unit assisted living community on Lots 2 and 3 of Louisville Plaza <br />Filing 2. , with the following condition: <br />1. Prior to the City Council hearing, the applicant shall incorporate a minimum of six mature <br />trees into the overall landscape plan on the east and northeast side of the site. The <br />trees will be a mix of deciduous and evergreen trees which will provide a mature <br />landscape buffer and appropriate transition to the surrounding public open space and <br />single family residential neighborhood; that the applicant and the City work <br />collaboratively to preserve as much as feasible of the existing landscaping. <br />seconded by Moline. Roll call vote. <br />Name <br />Vote <br />Chris Pritchard <br />n/a <br />Cary Ten ler <br />No <br />Ann O'Connell <br />No <br />Jeff Moline <br />No <br />Steve Brauneis <br />n/a <br />Tom Rice <br />Yes <br />David Hsu <br />No <br />Motion assed/failed: <br />Fail <br />Motion fails 4-1. <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.