Resolution 2006-24 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

RESOLUTION NO. 24 SERIES 2006 A RESOLUTION DISAPPROVING A FINAL PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT (PUD) PLAN FOR LOTS 6 AND 10, BLOCK 3, COLORADO TECHNOLOGICAL CENTER (CTC), FIRST FILING AND MINOR SUBDIVISION REPLAT FOR LOTS 5, 6 AND 10, BLOCK 3, CTC FIRST FILING (CTC STORAGE) WHEREAS, there has been submitted to the Louisville City Council a request for approval of a final planned unit development (PUD) plan for Lots 6 and 10, Block 3, CTC First Filing and a minor subdivision replat for Lots 5 (plat only), 6 and 10, Block 3, CTC First Filing; and WHEREAS, the applicant proposes to develop the property with five buildings totaling approximately 78,000 SF, divided into multiple warehousing and storage units; and WHEREAS, the applicant proposes that the units would be owned by a single entity and leased to users, but would not incorporate on-site management; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission held a public hearing on the application on February 9,2006, where evidence and testimony were entered into the record, including the application, the Staff Report dated February 9,2006, and where a meeting was held on March 9, 2006 for the purpose of adopting findings of fact; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission adopted a resolution recommending disapproval based upon the following findings: 1. The lack of on-site management is determined to be insufficient to ensure compliance with all applicable land use and design requirements from the IDDSG and Chapter 17.12 of the LMC. 2. The proposed site plan does not create sufficient view corridors to allow the Department of Public Safety adequate visual access for ongoing property monitoring and surveillance. 3. The applicant did not demonstrate that the management and ongoing monitoring of the video surveillance of the sanitary dump station would be sufficient to ensure no illicit dumping of materials would occur. 4. The applicant failed to demonstrate how the proposed land use would be in accordance with the City's Comprehensive Plan, which Plan recommends a diverse mix of employment based land uses and associated professional and retail services to complement and support the employees of the CTC area. 5. The proposed architectural design ofthe building did not provide a sufficient level of detailing to meet the requirements of Section 4.3.1 (Public Zones) of the IDDSG.