Planning Commission Minutes 2022 04 14

Home Browse Search

Planning Commission Meeting Minutes April 14, 2022 Page 4 of 8 Brauneis asks who usually pays for mailing costs. Zuccaro says that there is a public notice fee that is charged on all land use applications. He says it does not cover all the mailing costs though. He mentions that for historic preservation applications, we typically do no charge any fees since we are trying to promote the program. Maybe that could be something staff does in house although we do many of public notices for historic preservation and it is time consuming. He says that most mailings are between 20-40 pieces of mail. Krantz asks if it would be possible to allow the applicants to opt into an email notification instead of a hard copy. Zuccaro says that would be an interesting question for the City Attorney. Kay Marchetti mentions that there are cities that do email notices. Moline says by going on the Assessor webpage and running the mailing list of 500 ft around City Hall's address, 172 properties populate. Diehl asks if it is determined that the applicant did not do what they said they did, what consequence is there? Zuccaro says if we found out before it was approved, we would make them go back through the hearing process again. If they had gotten it approved, we would have to speak to the City Attorney about how to go through the hearing process again. Kay Marchetti mentions that staff has discussed a requirement to make City Hall as the return address to ensure that they did do the mailings. Public Comment: None is heard. Closing Statement by Staff None is heard. Discussion by Commissioners: Hoefner says that this seems like a good thing to free up staff's time for more important items. He mentions that it might be wise in the future to revisit an electronic option. Moline says he is in support of this so that staff can work on other more pressing items. He is encouraged that this is a common practice. Oysterman says she is in favor of this. It makes sense to free up staff's time. Howe says he is concerned about the financial burden on the applicant but he is in support of freeing up more time for staff. Krantz says she thinks this is a great idea. From her own experience, she trusts that staff will help the applicant in this process and not make it a burden to them. Brauneis says he is in favor of this and is not concerned about passing the cost on to the applicant. He thinks this should come out of the applicant's resources instead of the city using taxpayer resources. Hoefner moves and Moline seconds a motion to approve Resolution 6, Series 2022. Motion passes unanimously by a roll call vote. B. LMC Amendment — Electric Vehicle Charging Alternatives following Marshall Fire: Consideration of a draft ordinance amending the Louisville Municipal Code Section 17.20.170.C. allowing an alternative to installing electric vehicle charging infrastructure as part of the rebuilding of structures significantly damaged or destroyed by the Marshall Fire.