Planning Commission Agenda and Packet 2021 12 09

Home Browse Search

Planning Commission Meeting Minutes November 11, 2021 Page 2 of 12 Howe stated that he was not in attendance at the June 24t" meeting and had reviewed the minutes and video from the meeting he had missed. Commissioners Brauneis, Williams, and Moline disclosed their absences from previous hearings and stated that they had reviewed all relevant materials, as well. Commissioner Williams added to her statement that she had also watched the Council minutes. She disclosed that she lived near the property but had heard multiple iterations of the application and felt she could be impartial. Ritchie noted that all of the commissioners had voted at one time or another over the course of the multiple times this application had come before the Commission in 2021, but tonight would be the first time they had all voted at once due to the various commissioner absences at previous meetings. She shared that there had been public statements that the timing of the previous hearings had been manipulated to affect the voting, but she explained that all of the commissioners had voted on the application across the multiple hearings and had they all been in attendance at once the vote would have been 4-2. Ritchie went on to explain that the application had gone before City Council on October 5t" and had been remanded back to the Planning Commission with direction to consider more senior housing and commercial. Williams stated that she had not voted in August. Ritchie presented the application, stating that senior housing had been part of the previous approval and describing the relevant regulations and guidelines from the City guiding the application and its review. Diehl asked about the 5,000 square feet of commercial change and the effect on density. Ritchie replied that the residential density would not decrease but from a site plan perspective there was adequate room to accommodate an additional 5,000 square feet of commercial. The developer had not updated the site plan because it was conceptual and the plan would likely be changed from talking with neighbors anyway. Diehl asked about the maximum Floor Area Ratio (FAR). Ritchie replied that there was not a maximum for commercial but there was an FAR for the overall General Development Plan (GDP). Moline asked if there was any data that would lead anyone to think that Louisville was deficient in senior housing. Ritchie replied that because the city was so short on housing for everyone it was hard to say if people were getting what they wanted, but there was no data that she was aware of that would tell either way. Moline stated that affordability was an issue for everyone in the city and at this point in our country's history there may be a greater need for general affordability than a designation for a particular portion of the population.