Planning Commission Minutes 2018 03 08

Home Browse Search

Planning Commission Meeting Minutes March 8, 2018 Page 6 of 14 Zuccaro stated that staff found they did not need additional open space. Brauneis asked about maintenance of the City -owned property. Zuccaro stated that the HOA would maintain the trail and landscaping on the area of the property in perpetuity. Brauneis asked if the on -site park would be accessible to anyone. Zuccaro stated that it would be private. Brauneis asked if the development had been referred to the Historic Preservation Commission. Zuccaro stated that it was referred to HPC for a demolition review. The age of the houses met the requirements for demolition review. Brauneis asked for further questions of staff. Seeing none, he asked for the applicant presentation. Erik Hartronft, 950 Spruce Street Suite 2A in Louisville, presented the Final Plat and PUD. He stated that they were trying to mesh a new urban design with a Code from the 1970s, which was difficult. However, through working with staff they came to a proposal with fewer townhomes and more open space. He stated that the intersection of Highway 42 and 96t" Street was a gateway area and that the development wanted to be a nice gateway for the City. Hartronft stated that multi -family development was compatible with surrounding uses and the proposed density was supported by zoning. He stated that the gateway landscaping and the trail were public benefits, as was the accommodation for off -site storm water regional detention that was proposed on the City parcel. The trail would link East Street with the Coal Creek Trail He added that Parks and Open Space had given a lot of input on the design for the City parcel. Hartronft stated that the townhomes were good for starter homes with a lower price -point than a stand-alone home, though they would not be low-income housing, noting that Louisville did not have a low-income housing requirement. He added that 40% of the townhomes were first -floor masters, which would be good for seniors. The design was split into three parts. In North Clementine, nine units had main -floor masters, front -load garages with porches, and backyards. They had a more suburban feel, even though they were townhomes. Clementine Street had parking from one side and the front -loading units have driveways. Public Works recommended that there be no parking on East Street. In the Central District, the homes had had alley -loaded garages and faced common courtyards. They were not lot line to lot line, as they had some small space for private landscaping. The units facing East Street have garages in back and porches on front. They face the detention pond on the City parcel. The buildings visible from Highway 42 have an Old Town feel, whereas the ones in the central section have a more urban feel with gables. Hartronft showed an elevation of the proposed development to show the variety of the buildings and the attempt to capture the feeling of Old Town, instead of a more urban feel. He then showed the front of the North Commons Row Homes, which had flat roofs instead of gables. He added that without the height waiver, they would have to build flat -roofed buildings in the North Commons Row Homes. The height waiver allowed for the Old Town feel with gabled roofs. On the North Common gables, they required a 3' waiver. Facing East Street they needed 3.8' waivers. The ends did not need waivers, but the center section did. He addressed Commissioner Rice's point that the units facing other residential neighbors did not require a waiver. He finished his presentation by asking the Commission for their questions. Hoefner asked what specifically about the proposal supported the height waiver request. Hartronft stated that single-family homes would have yards and there would not be any open space. He added that it was not big enough to have a City Park, and that the City would rather have the 15% to spend somewhere else. Hoefner clarified that the private open space was in place of yardage.