Planning Commission Minutes 2006 09 14

Home Browse Search

Planning Commission Meeting Minutes SEPTEMBER 14, 2006 Page 8 of 15 4) The Commission has to express some trust with the developer that he will develop the area as he has outlined throughout the application and review process. 5) He concluded by stating that he supports the request. Deborski made the following points: 1) The development is 34 units over entitlement. 2) He supports the solution offered by Moline regarding the trail width of 20' instead of the proposed 10'. 3) If approval is done then it should be only for Phase I and not commit to the 350 requested units. 4) He would like to see the commercial/retail as part of Phase I and he asked if there is anyway the Commission can condition that. 5) He still supports an affordable housing component. Sheets expressed the following: 1) The applicant needs to provide a more realistic timeframe for the commercial development. She also encouraged the applicant to include it as part of the Phase I. 2) She would like to have in writing a commitment to "Build Green" as the applicant has stated several times. 3) She would also like to see the applicant commit to a trail connectivity plan with the City that would connect this development with the HWY 42 Revitalization Area and Downtown. 4) She stated her disappointment and dismay that the Art Center had been removed from the proj ect. Pritchard stated the following: 1) The applicant has done what we as a Commission requested. 2) As a community we must take a leap of faith that the applicant will develop the property as he has presented. 3) An Art Center at this location is not in the best interest for Louisville. 4) The City needs to work with the applicant in addressing a solution to condition #12 regarding the width of all trails. Loo stated the following: 1) She agrees with everything that Pritchard said. 2) The project is a good in-fill that provides a higher density which is an answer to urban sprawl. 3) The project will give a new market and architecture for people to choose from. 4) The applicant has addressed her concerns and she supports the project. Hartman expressed the following: 1) The applicant has done what the Commission requested him to do. 2) She stated her disappointment that an affordable housing unit component had not been included. 3) She too would like to see the "Build Green" commitment in writing. 4) The solution offered by Moline regarding Condition #12 is good. 5) She is also concerned with the timing for the commercial/retail and would like to see it as part of Phase I.