Planning Commission Minutes 2006 05 25

Home Browse Search

Planning Commission Meeting Minutes MAY 25 2006 Page 6 of 9 Lipton had the following comments: 1) He acknowledged that the property owner does have rights to develop the property. 2) Commission is entrusted to determine what is in the best interest of Louisville. 3) There needs to be a better balance of entitlements between the two areas within the project. 4) The area should have more retail/commercial instead of the requested reduction. 5) Mfordable housing is difficult to achieve. 6) Number of units should not exceed 400. 7) A trail connection plan needs to be developed so this area will have connectivity to the rest of Louisville. 8) The Art Center is a good idea but not in this area of Louisville. Sheets had the following comments: 1) The number of units should be the entitlements, which could be increased if affordable units would be added. 2) The retail/commercial should be at the location as proposed. 3) The residents of Lafayette should continue to talk with their Council and encourage them to purchase the property from the owner if they want the area as open space. 4) The Hecla Lake analysis needs more discussion and clarification. 5) The Art Center is a good idea and although the size might not be what the Louisville Arts Council wants it would be a good asset for the City and draw business to the adjacent retail. 6) Trail connectivity to the rest of Louisville needs more work. Deborski had the following comments: 1) The number of units is critical. The Alkonis and Hamm properties need to have units available for any future development. The Comprehensive Plan should serve as the guide for the number of units for development. 2) Any number of units over entitlement should be designated as affordable. 3) The retail/commercial needs to be retained not decreased as requested. McAvinew had the following comments: 1) The retail/commercial entitlements are a concern when the fiscal analysis is reviewed. 2) The current review is a preliminary so the Commission will have an opportunity to review again through the final review process. 3) The development needs to be a part of Louisville and not have the feel of an island. 4) The traffic problems need to be addressed before complete build-out. Lipton discussed the number of units, how each Commissioner had calculated what should be allowed. He then proposed the following: The single-family lots on the north and along the east side of the property should be larger lots. The Commercial Area along South Boulder Road should be increased by approximately 50% along either side of the round-a-bout. If those changes are done then the number of units would be decreased and might be close to 350 units. He also recommended that the number of affordable units should be determined by City Council. Lipton moved and Pritchard seconded a motion to approve Resolution No.6, Series 2006 with the following conditions: 1. The design standards for the street system network and the proposed round-a-bout shall be subject to further review and acceptance by the City as part of final review.