Fact Sheet

REDTAIL RIDGE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT PROPOSAL

Why is the city council considering changing the comprehensive plan?

Brue Baukol Capital Partners (“the applicant”) is under contract to purchase the Conoco Phillips property (formerly Storage Tek). The plan the applicant submitted does not fit within the current site zoning. Therefore, before City Council can consider their development plan, they must consider amending the comprehensive plan and changing the zoning.  This is the first decision that City Council will make on August 18.

What is the Louisville comprehensive plan?

“The comprehensive plan is a policy document that provides the vision for what a community wants to become and the steps that need to be taken to reach that vision. The plan documents provide guidance and direction to local leaders.” The latest comprehensive plan was adopted by City Council in 2013 as an official policy document for the city.  The plan was created with significant public input via numerous meetings and workshops.  It has not been amended since it was created in 2013.

What laws apply to comprehensive plan changes?

Comprehensive plan change requirements are outlined under Title 17 “Zoning” of Louisville’s Municipal Code. Specifically, Comprehensive plan change requirements are codified in Sec. 17.64.070. – “Criteria for amendment”.  Sec. 17.64.070 specifically states, "Before an amendment to the comprehensive plan may be adopted, it must be demonstrated that four specific criteria have either been met or are not applicable." In other words, if the applicant's request fails to meet any one criteria, the change cannot be approved. 

Do the changes proposed by the applicant meet the requirements for City Council to amend the Plan?

No. The developer has the responsibility to demonstrate that they meet each of the four comprehensive plan criteria. It would be difficult to argue that the proposed changes meet any of the criteria.

Do City Planning Staff support a comprehensive plan change?

No. Planning staff's analysis of the criteria for a comprehensive plan amendment is included in the August 4th meeting packet, under City Council Communication for Agenda Item 7A. This is on page 53 to page 58 of the full packet for the August 4 meeting. Staff does not draw conclusions but does point to several potentially problematic areas for City Council to consider.

Does the Planning Commission support a comprehensive plan change?

No. The Planning Commission unanimously voted against the applicant’s request for a comprehensive plan amendment. Their findings are included on page 67 the full packet for the August 4 meeting.

Specifically, how is the proposed comprehensive plan amendment out of compliance with the criteria in the municipal code?

The Request does not meet Sec. 17.64.070. Amendment Criterion A: “The amendment request is consistent with the goals, policies and intent of the comprehensive plan of the city.” 

The comprehensive plan includes “Core Community Values.” The proposed changes are contradictory to at least three of the core values:

(1) Core Value:  “A Sense of Community . . . where residents, property owners, business owners, and visitors feel a connection to Louisville and to each other, and where the City’s character, physical form and accessible government contribute to a citizenry that is actively involved in the decision-making process to meet their individual and collective needs.”  

The planning department estimates there are around 8,500 housing units in Louisville. This development would add 2,226 residential units.  Therefore, this development, would  increase the number of residential units by 25%.  This would essentially create a second city within Louisville. It's location is not conducive to a sense of connection to the rest of Louisville.   The overall massive 6 million square foot development area would permanently alter the city’s character.

(2) Core Value: “Our Livable Small Town Feel…where the City’s high-quality customer service complements its size, scale, and land use mixture to encourage personal and commercial interactions.”

Livable Small Town Feel cannot be met by tripling the size of the development from what StorageTek was allowed and adding about 25% more new residential units to the city.  Because its location means visitors and residents will rely mostly on cars for access, few personal interactions are likely to occur. 

(3) Core Value: “Sustainable Practices for the Economy, Community, and the Environment . . . where the City challenges our government, residents, property owners, and our business owners to be innovative with sustainable practices so that the needs of today are met without compromising the needs of future generations.”

Fails on all three counts:    Environment - It would add 60% to current traffic creating ozone and climate changing pollution. Massive buildings would add more carbon pollution.  The proposed open space allocation  is a fraction of what StrageTek had.   Community – The scale is so massive that it changes Louisville residents' quality of life through traffic, downtown crowding, and loss of cohesive community.  Economy – It undermines the long term sustainability of the general fund and open space funds in perpetuity.

The Request does not meet Sec. 17.64.070. Amendment Criterion B: “The amendment request will not result in adverse impacts to existing or planned services to the citizens of the city.”

The development would negatively impact the city general and open space funds in perpetuity. Any up-front, short-term gain would be lost over time.  It will create maintenance obligations to the city for roads, drinking and wastewater treatment, and other infrastructure in perpetuity.  

The Request does not meet Sec. 17.64.070. Amendment Criterion C: “The amendment request demonstrates a need exists for the amendment through either changed conditions or past error which support adjustments to the city's comprehensive plan.”

This fails on both points.  The property has not changed since the ConocoPhillips development was approved.  The passage of time does not change the physical condition and the prime location of the land.   There was no past error to approve ConocoPhillips by a previous Planning Commission and City Council.  The planning process met all the requirements and has not been challenged.

The Request does not meet Sec. 17.64.070. Amendment Criterion D: “The planning commission and/or city council may consider other factors in reviewing an application as they deem appropriate and may request additional information which is necessary for an adequate review and evaluation of the amendment.”

Public opinion – Planning Department Director Rod Zuccaro told the Planning Commission that this includes public opinion.  Most people who have expressed opinions believe Redtail Ridge would be too large for the site, and for Louisville. Overwhelming opposition by Louisville residents was one of reasons for the Planning Commission's unanimous denial of the application. 

No proof - The developer has not demonstrated that they can’t make the project work at the three million square feet allowed by the “Rural” comprehensive plan designation.  No proforma, no in-depth analysis, no disclosure has been provided.  Medtronic and Erickson Living could easily within in that footprint, with lots of commercial and retail space to spare.  They need to prove their assertions, and they have not.

The developer has not shown that the rental units  they propose will not become a drain on city finances. This is a particularly likely outcome if the residential is built before the site’s commercial and retail spaces, as these generate more revenue for the city than residential alone. Unfortunately, it is sometimes the case that the commercial and retail spaces promised by developers to offset the costs of residential development never materializes.