Laserfiche WebLink
<br /> ,. c? <br /> A: <br /> ORDINANCE NO. _823 <br /> AN ORDINANCE REPEALING ORDINANCE NO. 808 <br /> WHICH PURPORTED TO REZONE A PARCEL OF <br /> PROPERTY OWNED BY LOUISVILLE ASSOCIATES. <br /> WHEREAS, Ordinance No. 808 was passed by the City Council <br /> of the City of Louisville on Dec em ber 6, 1983; and, <br /> WHEREAS, said Ordinance purported to rezone property <br /> located within the City of Louisville owned by Louisville Associates; <br /> and, <br /> WHEREAS, within thirty days of the passage of said <br /> Ordinance, referendum petitions were filed with the City of <br /> Louisville requesting that Ordinance No. 808 be repealed or submitted <br /> to a vote of the registered electorate; and, <br /> WHEREAS, on February 7, 1984, the Ci ty Council of the City <br /> of Louisville, held a public hearing concerning said Ordinance and <br /> whether the same should be repealed; and, <br /> WHEREAS, after said public hearing and consideration of the <br /> matter, the City Council of the City of Louisville, Colorado believes <br /> that Ordinance No. 808 should be repealed. <br /> NOW THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE <br /> CITY OF LOUISVILLE, COLORADO: <br /> Section 1 . Ordinance No. 808 previously voted upon by the <br /> City Council but not yet effective, shall be hereby repealed as set <br /> forth in C. R. S. 1-40-115. <br /> Section 2 . The City Council of the City of Louisville, <br /> Colorado hereby makes and adopts the following findings with respect <br /> to the repeal of Ordinance No. 1308: <br /> 1 . The proposed rezoning may be detrimental to the City <br /> with respect to financial aspects. Residential development proposed <br /> will cause financial deficits for the City. <br /> 2 . The quality of services supplied to residents of the <br /> City may be impaired or lessened by the rezoning. <br /> 3. The building permit phasing plan proposed with respect <br /> to the rezoning is not adequate to meet financial concerns. <br /> 4. The development pr'oposed upon Parcel "B" in conjunction <br /> with the rezoning is inconsistent with the current open space <br /> designation of the parcel. <br /> 5 . The full development of a park by the City upon Parcel <br /> "C" would not be beneficial to the City. <br />