Planning Commission Agenda and Packet 2023 11 09

Home Browse Search

Planning Commission Meeting Minutes September 14, 2023 Page 8 of 14 Closing Statement by Staff. None was heard. Brauneis closed the public hearing. Discussion by Commissioners: Moline supported the rezoning application, and agreed with staff assessment that it was in the public interest. He did not believe that commercial business would fill the remaining lots as the Commission had once planned, so rezoning the site to residential would be appropriate. He added that new housing units were needed in the city, and that he did not believe there would be a noticeable increase to traffic. He noted that the rezoning would increase costs on the city, but he concurred with some of the public commenters that this would be a very desirable location for housing, and would therefore be worth the cost. He also noted that the City was involved in the Future 42 study, which should help to address some of the traffic issues on Highway 42 in the future. Howe thanked Zuccaro for the objective and informative presentation, and Liveforward for the community outreach they had conducted. He commiserated with some of the risks raised during the hearing, including the fiscal impact on the City, but he believed that they would be offset by the increased walking traffic to retail businesses and restaurants downtown. He believed that it would increase traffic over its current zoning, and that the city should comprehensively look at downtown traffic patterns, which would help to allay some concerns. Ultimately, he thought that the benefits outweighed the risks of the proposal, and therefore was in support of it. Osterman was strongly in support of the rezoning proposal. She though that the rezoning met the policy criteria, and that there was low demand for commercial in this area. She added that she feared there would be more vacant lots on the property if the rezoning was not approved. The development would also bring much needed housing, including affordable housing, and could potentially allow for more workers in downtown Louisville to live nearby. She also recognized and appreciated the applicant's community engagement efforts. Baskett was in support of the rezoning. She saw it as a logical place to have housing with the way Highway 42 was developing. She said that the Future 42 study looked at creating a corridor for all users, not just drivers. She was excited about the affordable housing units, and shared that her own experience with renter neighbors was that they were long term renter who were invested in their community. As such, she did not have an issue with the development being all -rental units. She also said that the development would help create a neighborhood feel, bookending other residential developments in the area. City of Louisville Community Development 749 Main Street Louisville CO 80027 303.335.4592 www.LouisvilleCO.gov