Laserfiche WebLink
Planning Commission <br />Meeting Minutes <br />JUNE 11, 2009 <br />Page 7 of 14 <br />Hartman had questions about visitor parking. <br />Wood stated it would be permitted on the street, limited availability on the site <br />and no parking on the alley. <br />Russell discussed the maintenance of the alley. <br />Wood stated the alley would be public ROW and maintained by the City. The <br />applicant, as with all other applications, will be required to provide the signage. <br />Tengler asked staff if the proposal would have more or fewer cars to park on site <br />then the previous uses of the property. <br />Wood stated it would be probably be fewer cars because there are fewer <br />structures. <br />Wood requested the Commission enter into public record the following emails <br />and letters that have been received regarding the project: <br />Name Address Support Against <br />Nancy Cooley Business owner X <br />Fred Bacher 520 Main X <br />Tim & Amy Hancock 500 Grant X <br />Dave Dutch 544 Main X <br />Kara Reese Business owner X <br />Patrica Ehman & Crul Keres Unknown X <br />Loo moved and Tengler seconded a motion to enter those items into public <br />record. Motion passed by voice vote. <br />Applicant Presentation: <br />Garrett Mundelein, 520 Main Street, Louisville, CO used a visual program that <br />provided a walk through of the site. He continued with a discussion of each <br />condition of approval. Following is a brief note regarding each condition: <br />1) Will continue to work with Staff to resolve the public use dedication. <br />2) Agrees to requested modifications to reflect the rear setback waivers. <br />3) Requesting a FAR of .45 <br />4) Agrees to remove note #13 on the Improvement Survey Plat. <br />5) Agrees to remove dashed lines representing building envelop and <br />footprint. <br />6) Proposed a modified demolitation process. The plan would allow for his <br />company to use one of the buildings as an office during the development <br />process. <br />7) Agrees to remove Unit 2 of Building One from the drainage easement. <br />8) Discussed the fire rating and the sprinkling of the buildings. Requested the <br />removal of this condition. <br />9) Agrees with requested setback and building separation correction. <br />10) Agrees with additional note regarding no parking in the alley. <br />11) Agrees with requested landscape modification. <br /> <br />