My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
Planning Commission Minutes 2017 11 09
PORTAL
>
BOARDS COMMISSIONS COMMITTEES RECORDS (20.000)
>
PLANNING COMMISSION
>
2000-2019 Planning Commission
>
2017 Planning Commission Agendas Packets Minutes
>
Planning Commission Minutes 2017 11 09
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
7/9/2020 1:28:25 PM
Creation date
7/9/2020 11:46:19 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
City Council Records
Meeting Date
11/9/2017
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.
/
7
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 />November 9, 2017 <br />Page 5 of 7 <br />Pritchard asked for questions of staff <br />Rice asked if the mechanical screen was below height limits and how that height compared to <br />other buildings on either side. <br />Ritchie responded that it was higher than buildings on either side, but that it was well below <br />height limits. <br />Andy Johnson of DAJ Design at 922A Main Street, Louisville, CO presented plans for the <br />addition. Johnson stated that the PUD was more an alley project than a Main Street project as <br />the changes are set back about 120 feet from Main Street Back. Pedestrians will not see the <br />addition unless they are on Spruce or in the alley. The mechanical screen as proposed is sized <br />large, as DAJ doesn't know what the mechanical equipment will be. Johnson anticipated that <br />the screen would be about half the proposed size. He compared the size to the library behind <br />the building, stating that the mechanical screen is much shorter than the library. He added that <br />the PUD is a simplistic, utilitarian structure. <br />Pritchard asked for questions of the applicant. <br />Hsu asked about the material for the mechanical screen. <br />Johnson stated that they looked for something with a natural character of stucco and wood and <br />chose rusted steel. <br />Rice asked about nearby structures in the alley and their heights. <br />Johnson replied that the Empire and Wildwood were nearby and shorter. <br />Rice clarified that the six-foot screen in the sketch was a maximum height. <br />Johnson confirmed that six feet was a maximum height, as the screen would cover a vent, <br />which would be wide and not too high. <br />Pritchard asked if they were going to be able to hide the roof door and asked if it was for <br />maintenance on the roof. <br />Johnson responded that yes it was for maintenance and that the windows and door for roof <br />access would not be visible from street as they would be painted to blend into the wall. He <br />stated that ladder access from the ground was an unsafe option. <br />Pritchard asked if there would be an increase in traffic in the alley if the applicant wanted to <br />expand their catering business. <br />Johnson responded that the alley already supported two-way traffic. The PUD would provide <br />parking spaces to organize loading and unloading and the proposed enclosed trash and <br />recycling would stop trash from migrating into the alley. He added that Zucca had a relief in the <br />back of the building that accommodated a truck and that the overall aim was to pull trucks off <br />the alley. <br />Pritchard added that it was a one-way alley because of the library book drop. He requested that <br />staff look into one-way designation. <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.