City Council Minutes 2002 09 03 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

Louisville City Council Meeting September 3, 2002 Page 9 MOTION: Sisk moved that Council approve Resolution No. 31, Series 2002, seconded by Keany. Roll call vote was taken. The motion passed by a vote of 7-0. RESOLUTION NO. 32, SERIES 2002 - AMENDED PUD DEVELOPMENT PLAN & SPECIAL REVIEW USE FOR AN AUTO BODY REPAIR FACILITY IN AN INDUSTRIAL ZONE, COAL CREEK COLLISION CENTER, 1100 COURTESY ROAD, LOT 7, BLOCK A Davidson called for Staff presentation. Principal Planner Ken Johnstone reviewed that property owners/applicants Ed and Joan Ladley, are requesting approval of a special review use (SRU) and final PUD development to operate an auto body repair facility in an existing building at 1100 Courtesy Road. He stated that it is an existing and vacant building, zoned Industrial. He explained that automotive repair is not a "use by right" in any zoning district and requires a special review use permit. Johnstone reported that the Planning Commission reviewed the preliminary application on May 14, 2002, the final PUD/SRU application on August 13, 2002, and forwards approval with six conditions. Johnstone reviewed the property's background, which is approximately 1.4 acres, and has existing connecting buildings. He explained the buildings were constructed in 1962, and designed for industrial uses. The site itself has not been improved, nor is it landscaped and has a gravel parking lot. Johnstone referenced the pending Highway 42 Revitalization Area Study, which is proposed as a comprehensive plan amendment. The study addresses various concerns, such as land use compatibility, transportation, public improvements and a potential for a commuter rail station. He explained the plan is tentatively scheduled for a public hearing review in late 2002. He noted that Staff made the applicant aware of the ongoing plan process and that the recommendations of the study may not be consistent with the reuse of the building that they are proposing. He stated that Staff reiterated those concerns with the proposal to the Planning Commission. While the Commission acknowledged those concerns, they felt it appropriate to review the application relative to the City's existing comprehensive plan and zoning regulations. Johnstone stated that the applicant is proposing to comply with the IDDSG standards and guidelines. Improvements to the property include paving of the parking lot, the addition of drive isle, landscaping and other site improvements. The applicant is requesting one exception to the standards, an outside storage area to accommodate inoperable vehicles, which will be screened by a masonry wall. He noted Staff and the Planning Commission have supported that request, as it will be important to screen those vehicles, if the SRU is approved. Due to the site modifications, the application is being processed as a planned unit development in addition to the SRU. The application is subject to review relative to the City's Industrial Development Design Standards and Guidelines (IDDSG). 9