My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
Planning Commission Minutes 2010 07 08
PORTAL
>
BOARDS COMMISSIONS COMMITTEES RECORDS (20.000)
>
PLANNING COMMISSION
>
2000-2019 Planning Commission
>
2010 Planning Commission Agendas Packets Minutes
>
Planning Commission Minutes 2010 07 08
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
3/11/2021 9:55:19 AM
Creation date
9/21/2010 10:09:40 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
City Council Records
Doc Type
Boards Commissions Committees Records
Supplemental fields
Test
PCMIN 2010 07 08
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
8
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
Show annotations
View images
View plain text
Planning Commission <br />Meeting Minutes <br />July 8, 2010 <br />Page 7 of 8 <br /> <br />Wheat Ridge allows all uses as an administrative review and a public <br /> <br /> <br />hearing only if opposition is received at a neighborhood meeting. <br />Steamboat has specific SRU’s eligible for Administrative Review. <br /> <br /> <br />Russ stated staff recommends following the Wheat Ridge model and include a <br />21-day notification requirement. <br />Other discussion centered on the following questions from the Commissioners: <br />How many negative comments would initiate a public hearing? Different <br /> <br /> <br />scenarios were discussed. <br />Did staff review other Boulder County Communities? No, but will follow-up <br /> <br /> <br />with the suggestion. <br />The wording of the criteria is worrisome. Staff clarified the wording came <br /> <br /> <br />from the CMRS SRU administrative criteria and would require editing for <br />other SRU’s. <br />What type of vesting does the applicant receive through this process? <br /> <br /> <br />Would there be an appeal process available after an Administrative SRU <br /> <br /> <br />approval? <br />Some type of fee structure would need to be created. <br /> <br /> <br />If approved, then staff should provide on a monthly basis a summary <br /> <br /> <br />report to Planning Commission what SRU’s have been administratively <br />approved. <br />It was the general consensus of the Commission for staff to proceed with a <br />recommendation. <br /> <br /> <br />2010 Planning Long Range Goals / Projects / Activities <br /> <br />Russ reviewed the 2010 / 2011 Work Plan Staff Report. Under the Emerging <br />Projects topic, he added the Grant for Historic Preservation Commission which <br />includes an architectural inventory of the homes in the Jefferson Place <br />Subdivision. <br />Other topics suggested by the commissioners included: mass transit, bus <br />shelters throughout town, clarity of the FasTracks project, and the Mixed Use <br />Development Design Standards and Guidelines (MUDDSG) within the Highway <br />42 Revitalization Area. It was stated they need background information for the <br />MUDDSG as well as a review of the design standard for ground floor commercial <br /> <br />and residential above. <br />The following items are scheduled for August 19, 2010 <br />tentatively <br /> <br />City Solar Panels – A special review use (SRU) request to install solar <br /> <br />panels at the three (3) water treatment plants owned and operated by the <br />City of Louisville. <br /> <br /> <br />A resolution recommending approval of an ordinance amending downtown <br /> <br />sign code regulations within the following documents: <br /> <br />Louisville Municipal Code Chapter 17.24 <br /> <br /> <br /> <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.