Louisville planning commission to vote on revised Redtail Ridge plan that is shockingly similar to the one rejected by Louisville voters.

Editor’s Note: Press Releases are provided to Yellow Scene. In an effort to keep our community informed, we publish some press releases in whole.

LOUISVILLE, CO, Aug. 4, 2022 – A revised version of the Redtail Ridge development plan will be heard by the Louisville planning commission on August 11. The original plan was rejected by voters on April 19. The planning commission will decide whether or not to recommend approval of the revised plan to city council.

Concerned residents are expected to make a showing at the planning commission hearing to remind city officials that they already voted down the massive development.

The main concerns of the thousands of residents who voted against the previous site plan were lack of open space and too much traffic. The revised plan has less open space and more traffic. Furthermore, the new plan removes the sustainability commitments, such as solar power power generation, that were included in the previous plan, leaving residents wondering why the planning commission will be hearing a proposal so shockingly similar to the one rejected by voters.

The revised site plan is almost the same as the rejected plan. The rejected plan called for 3 million sq. feet of industrial businesses, general office space, and retail. The revised plan calls for 2.6 million sq. feet with the same use types. The revised plan includes 66.06 acres of open space and 15.6 acres for a park. The rejected plan included 68.7 acres of open space and 14.6 acres for a park. Despite the decrease in square footage, the potential inclusion of medical facilities would increase traffic from 20,104 vehicle trips daily to 20,745 trips daily.

Since the developer has submitted the revised plan in a a different format, residents can no longer file a petition to overturn the decision if approved by the city council.

There is a substantial difference between the form of the revised plan and the rejected plan. The revised plan is in the form of a subdivision plat, while the rejected plan was in the form of a general development plan amendment. A general development plan is a higher level of zoning document than a subdivision plat. By submitting a subdivision plat under the existing 2010 ConocoPhillips general development plan, the application will not be subject to referendum.

Brue Baukol’s decision to develop under the 2010 plan raises some questions. For example, what development parameters in the 2010 plan, which was designed for a single user corporate campus, would apply to a commercial and flex-use development?

Contact: Sally Bruggeman | [email protected] | 612-644-9408