Planning Commission Minutes 2015 09 10

Home Browse Search

Planning Commission Meeting Minutes September 10, 2015 Page 12 of 21 preliminary does not resolve that but a final will. We are comfortable with this condition as part of the easement concern, not the adverse possession claim. If you have concerns, we can modify the resolution. O'Connell says she would be interested in what other people on the Commission think about resolving it versus discussing it, or if the applicant has any issues with that language of resolution versus continue to work on it. McClure says we are in full support of the language as written. I would add that we have a lot of work to do, a significant amount of work and investment between preliminary and final. Given how hard we have worked to get to where we are in the process now, we respectively request that we seek unanimous approval and we can move forward. The condition structured by Staff is strongly supported by us because it is good for the City of Louisville and good for our adjacent property owners. I am 110% confident that there is a solution. I'd like to work the solution out while I generate the necessary details that will allow me to submit a final approval. To digress, you never want to have a conversation where you don't know all the facts. We don't know all the facts because it is only in preliminary. When we finalize our market direction and we know our product types, we then can speak more intelligently to our final and desired access. Your approval this evening will put us in a position to go forth and justify that additional level of design which is when we'd like to address this issue. Summary and request by Staff and Applicant: Staff says from where we were this morning to where we are now, and hearing from the applicant and the landowners, we are extremely pleased and we recommend approval. Closed Public Hearing and discussion by Commission: Russell says he is in support. I am very confident that, given a year's time, we will work this out. We have two businesses that we can be very proud of. The developer does great work in this area and Louisville Tire is a fantastic business with which I am very well acquainted. O'Connell is in support with the conditions as proposed. Brauneis is in support. Moline is in support. Tengler is in support. Pritchard is in support. We are looking at preliminary here and the level of detail is not required. I am pleased the applicant is in agreement with the conditions of approval. Motion made by O'Connell to approve Resolution No. 27, Series 2015: A resolution recommending approval of a replat and rezoning for 4.39 acres which includes a 2.39 acre preliminary PUD, and Special Review Use (SRU) within the core area of the Highway 42 Revitalization District. If approved, the project area would be rezoned from industrial (1) to Mixed -Use Residential (MU-R) AND Mixed -Use Commercial (MU -CC) and developed to include 33 apartments, 13 live -work units, and 10,000 sf commercial floor area, with the following conditions: 1. Defer the sidewalk width waiver request until final submittal. 2. Remove any reference to a street tree allotment of 1 street tree per 50 feet of street frontage. 3. Easement concerns, with the Louisville Trade Center Plat, will be resolved prior to final approval. 4. The Applicant shall demonstrate architectural details for the residential buildings along Cannon Street at final PUD. Seconded by Moline. Roll call vote. Name Vote Chris Pritchard Yes Jeff Moline Yes