Laserfiche WebLink
o Anna Carlson, 929 LaFarge Avenue: Has lived in Louisville her whole life. Enjoys biking <br />and running in open space. Current plan gives up a lot of opportunity; she wants the <br />board to push a little more to protect it. Should think more about density considerations <br />and building heights; need to look into it a bit more before approval. Stated support for <br />more open space and greater wildlife corridors. <br />o Alexis Kahn, 1416 Fillmore Place (by Zoom meeting): Has lived in Louisville since 1986 <br />and been on both sides of debate. Hearing that the Northern piece is being referred to <br />as open space; it's not open space — it is private land. The land has been vacant for so <br />many years; would be nice to shift to usable open space in that area. Grateful that <br />developer has agreed to give additional land to the City for open space and listened to <br />voters in City. Said the City can't afford to purchase open space. Said it was unfortunate <br />the way the developer has been treated; does what is asked and then gets a Citizen <br />referendum. Council and staff have worked hard to get the proposal to this point. <br />Developer is already being generous; community already spent time and money on this <br />project. We should honor that work and stand by our word; we are not acting in good <br />faith as a City. <br />Board Discussion <br />Helen asked who owns parcels north of site. Rob pulled up map. The developer explained it is low <br />density residentially zoned and the developer owns two parcels north of the site in question. <br />A member of the public encouraged Board to learn more about buffer requirement with Paradise <br />Lane. <br />Charles mentioned that the Board had discussed trail connection options along Goodhue Ditch. <br />Discussion of alignment of Campus Drive. Asked if there could be a use for the existing developer <br />parcels. <br />David supported Redtail Ridge, but has been underwhelmed by what was dismissed by voters and <br />what is being presented here tonight. Doesn't seem like the results were modified by much. Difficult <br />to assume we'd get general public support given the outcome of the vote. Personally wants to make <br />sure we push for as much public land dedication as possible and put something out that Planning <br />Commission and Council will approve. <br />Charles noted that the plan as -is failed in the recent election. <br />David suggested it would be worthwhile to explore opportunities for preservation. <br />Charles does feel like we are moving the goal posts, but asked "what are the goal posts?" Currently <br />"closed open space" is not open. <br />Helen moved to request more time to enable a site visit. She asked for more information through <br />satellite, surveys, environmental impact on the property, the history of the larger land dedications <br />that were done previously. Helen noted that she was not familiar with the subdivision design <br />standards and would like to spend more time to understand our role and the criteria we need to <br />apply. Also would like to spend more time with the feedback from Citizen comments shared via <br />email the afternoon of the meeting. Noted that the City has hired but does not currently have <br />