Planning Commission Agenda and Packet 2020 08 13

Home Browse Search

Planning Commission Meeting Minutes June 25, 2020 Page 10 of 24 the applicant's presentation. Although the developer thinks this proposal will not add a greater burden to city services, he has concerns about that not being the case. There is a way forward for this. If the community wants this, we need to update the entire comprehensive plan in order for the plan to fit this proposal. An amendment to the comprehensive plan though is not enough because this development is just too much. Brauneis says he is concerned that this proposal does not meet the comprehensive plan criteria. The transportation and environmental impacts are both troubling and affect quality of life. He appreciates that Highway 36 and RTD cannot be backed into any commitments at this time, although it is clear that this project has regional impacts. The lack of discussion of those regional impacts concerns him. He agrees with what Commissioner Moline said in that he does see an imbalance between the new housing and jobs. Even though the affordable housing will be available for 40 years, it is concerning to him that it is not permanent. Howe says he read each comment from the public and that there are many items he likes about this proposal. For example, the land donation to the parks and open space, retaining the pond, and the expansion of Campus Drive are a few items he approves for the proposal. He says that it is important to remember that this is vacant land. It is not designated open space. With that, we need to think about how this space should be developed because it should be developed. We have to determine if we support an amendment to the comprehensive plan. He says he is not sure if he can do that given that thousands of individuals have given input in creating our existing comprehensive plan. He does think things have changed since the comprehensive plan was created though. He believes that in possibly 10-20 years, the city will see the need to change the comprehensive plan. He does not think the residents signed up for a high -density, residential, 26% growth in units in Louisville. He also mentions a concern that the development could have a lot of vacant buildings if the development's time frame is not constructed in a well thought out way. Louisville has seen a high vacancy rate for commercial and retail spaces. The city is also currently having trouble with traffic and there is already an increasing strain on the city's trails and parks. He mentions that he wants to see a win -win development proposal for the developer, the city, and the residents. Rice thinks a compelling case has been made by the applicant, but does not think this development meets the necessary criteria. For a proposal, this is the most public interest he has ever seen since he has started serving on planning commission and mentions that he has read each public comment submittal. He then reads a section of the municipal code that states that the commissioners must have at least two-thirds of an approval of the proposed amendment. This means that they must have five positive votes, and they are five commissioners present for this hearing. There must be a unanimous approval vote to pass this application and give city council a positive recommendation. This requirement exists because planning commission does not amend the comprehensive plan without a significant consensus. In his opinion, the commissioners should not approve this proposal without substantial consensus between the commissioners as well as the community. Hearing from the community and the commissioners, he does not think they are anywhere close to that in regards to the application as it is proposed now.