Planning Commission Agenda and Packet 2024 02 08

Home Browse Search

Planning Commission Meeting Minutes December 14, 2023 Page 5 of 10 Romero explained why they chose Louisville and noted their community orientation. Walters discussed the operations of the distillery, and their focus on sustainability. She said that they focused on local and self -grown ingredients. Romero and Peterson discussed the event space and parking requirements. Johnson discussed the details of the PUD. He noted that the site had been empty for a long time, and many had struggled to develop it. He discussed the connectivity of the site, with connections to trails. He addressed the history of the site and noted that there was no discussion in Council of the no build line. He discussed the proposed layout of the buildings, and the Joe's Metal Shop historic structure. He added that the stage was intended to be removable. Further Commissioner Questions of Staff: Zuccaro suggested changing the resolution around the no build line to include it as part of the PUD approval rather than as a change to the annexation agreement. Howe asked for clarification around whether there was a difference between the buffer and the no build line. Zuccaro clarified that he meant the no build line. Brauneis asked whether staff was suggesting removing the no build line altogether. Zuccaro said yes, as they believed the proposed application was in keeping with the spirit of the no build line. Commissioner Questions of Applicant: Johnson noted that the applicant would rather the no build line be removed entirely, but that the proposed alternative in the staff report would be acceptable. Krantz asked why removing it would be a priority if they only wanted to put the historic structure in it. Johnson said that future development would be the priority, and that removing it would more easily allow for future expansions. Krantz asked whether they would have changed design of building if the line could not be removed. Johnson said not necessarily, and that it was important to look at the context of the building and its surroundings. He noted that it was not surrounded by open space, and that it would likely remain a weed patch if it were not developed. Brauneis asked why the City would want to vacate the no build line. Zuccaro said he understood the concern, but that staff expected the building to be there for a long time, or to otherwise be reused. Removing the line would make it easier to expand the building in the future. Brauneis asked whether changes to the line would still be open to a request in the future if it were kept in place. Zuccaro said yes, it would be open to a request, but it would have to go through a PUD review. He noted that this was very different to a typical industrial use. 13