Planning Commission Agenda and Packet 2024 07 11

Home Browse Search

Planning Commission Meeting Minutes March 14, 2024 Page 6of8 Zuccaro added that other cities give the planning director broader authority to decide on cases like this, however staff wanted there to be more predictability in the code. Bangs also noted that former Mayor Maloney was still listed on the proposed ordinance, and that this would need to be changed. Hunt said that she was also in support, as she thought it would help to lessen the burden on staff and to eliminate redundancy. Mihaly said that he was in support. He felt that there would still be enough opportunity for public engagement, and that the proposal still had sufficient checks and balances in place. Moline said that he was in support, and that he was comfortable things would not be missed in the streamlined process. Brauneis noted that the things that tended to come up in a final review were the things that were only required for a final review, and that the Commission would therefore not miss any important information. He was in support of the proposal. Hunt moved to approve Resolution 2, Series 2024, with the condition that the words "extent", "location", and "or" be removed from § 17.28.250 B (3). This was seconded by Moline. The motion was adopted by a vote of 7 to 0. b) Comprehensive Plan Discussion — project update, vision and values discussion Staff Presentation: Hirt introduced the discussion on the Comprehensive Plan. Allison Cotey and Jessica Garrow, Design Workshop, presented an update on the Comprehensive Plan process. They covered what was and was not included in the plan, and the branding that was to be used for the plan. The focus for this discussion was to be on "Vision and Values" for the Comprehensive Plan. They asked the Commissioners how they had used previous Comprehensive Plans, and what they would like to see from the new one. Commissioner Discussion: Moline said that he had used the previous plan to help evaluate land use proposals, and found it useful as a way to be reminded of what people valued in Louisville. Brauneis noted that one challenge from previous plans was that much of the language was aspirational, making it harder to use as a determining factor. Choi said that he had previously used the plan to provide overall context to where the City was at that point and has applied that to his decision -making on applications before the Planning Commission. He also used it to identify what had changed in the City over time, and what parts of the plan were no longer relevant. Cotey asked what parts of the last plan Choi felt were no longer relevant. 8