Planning Commission Minutes 2021 05 20

Home Browse Search

Planning Commission Meeting Minutes May 20, 2021 Page 5 of 13 Williams stated that she was worried that they were going to hit the levels D and F faster than they thought they would. She pointed out that the plan overall planned for office users to use the space. Hardy stated that this project AM and PM projections did not come close to what ConocoPhillips had been and this project would have traffic distributed throughout the day versus the AM/PM distribution and traffic would be less overall by square footage. He thought that the AM/PM distribution would not be as relevant since it was a mix of office and industrial. Even at max buildout by 2035 the study said it was much lower than an all -office use as was approved 10 years ago. Brauneis invited public comment. Erin Lindsay, 826 Trail Ridge Drive, shared her concerns that the projected traffic volume did not seem realistic and about relying on tenants to achieve LEED Gold. She wondered if there were ways to create the hookups and space necessary for solar to meet the total demands of the site. Overall, she was concerned that nothing was binding or enforceable. Tess Weltzin, a student at Fairview High School, requested a more sustainable way of building and that the development have net -zero infrastructure in the interests of air, wildlife, and future generations. Tiffany Boyd, 550 Grant Avenue, stated that this was a development that relied on fossil fuels being built in the middle of a climate crisis. The threats from fossil fuels were well -documented and there were other developments nearby that were net -zero. The City could consider zoning, design guidelines, and building codes that could help address this issue. She requested more specific metrics on sustainability, believing that the PUD phase was too late, and that profits for the developers and the City were taking front seat. RJ Harrington, 457 Raintree Court, described the threats of climate change and the importance of reaching net zero by 2050 and stated that there was a lack of firm commitments to avoiding fossil fuel infrastructure in the development plan. Stephanie Rowe stated that the land was not a wasteland, showing photographs of the area and its wildlife. She noted that the plan called for the extermination of up to 5,000 prairie dogs and that the site had been undisturbed for the majority of its history; even with StorageTek only about a third of the area was occupied. She reminded the Commission that Part I of the Local land Use Controlling and Enabling Act addressed natural stewardship. Jerry McQuie, 972 St. Andrews Lane, thanked the applicant for complying with the Comprehensive Plan. He wanted to protect the viewshed of the highest point of the site, which was currently where the tallest building was proposed. He requested that the applicant modify the height plans to favor taller buildings on the lower elevations of the property. Matt Jones, 265 Dalia Drive, observed that this proposal was bigger than the previous one and the buildings that used to be on the space. He thought these should be more common open space that was public and private. He shared that Kestrel affordable housing was LEED Gold certified as was a development in Lafayette that was not near transportation. He thought that Gold should be the minimum and that Platinum was the real goal, and that the project should be net zero. He reminded the Commission that the buildings would be there forever and encouraged them to put additional conditions on the plan.