My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
Revitalization Commission Agenda and Packet 2011 07 11
PORTAL
>
BOARDS COMMISSIONS COMMITTEES RECORDS (20.000)
>
REVITALIZATION COMMISSION
>
2004-2019 Revitalization Commission Agendas and Packets
>
2011 Revitalization Commission Agendas and Packets
>
Revitalization Commission Agenda and Packet 2011 07 11
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
3/11/2021 10:17:58 AM
Creation date
7/12/2011 9:20:29 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
City Council Records
Doc Type
Boards Commissions Committees Records
Supplemental fields
Test
RCPKT 2011 07 11
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
23
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
Show annotations
View images
View plain text
Revitalization Commission <br />Agenda <br />June 13, 2011 <br />Page 2of 2 <br />would like neighborhood meetings to be integrated into the planning <br />process. <br />IX.Business Matters of Commission <br />A. Follow up discussion on May panel regarding mixed use guidelines <br />Bonnie provided potential on next steps. Michael thought the <br />discussion about density, population, and height was informative. He <br />would like to further explore opportunities based onhispremise that <br />every new dwelling unit does not cost the city money.If this is true <br />then some changes would be required. Emily stated that there was <br />an increased awareness of the infrastructure that would be required to <br />move the development potential forward (underpass, South Boulder <br />Road gateway, old town character). Carlos asked that the LRC <br />conduct a detailed analysis of publicbenefit and how the LRC can <br />leverage and use. The Mayor stated that he sees no need to make <br />widespread changes to the plan, potential get involved with quantify <br />economic benefit, and extending the URA “clock” for the TIF.Sam <br />provided background on Northglenn’s experience on “stopping the <br />clock”. Rob stated that council can handle height and density, but the <br />ground floor commercial requirement might be worth considering a <br />change. Karl stated that working from what we have is creating <br />demand. Bonnie provided a follow up on the question about how the <br />development community is engaging the city about moving forward <br />with the current plan. <br />B. Commercial Incentives –The Historic Preservation Commission <br />would like to discuss possible incentives for thosewishing to landmark <br />their historic commercial structures <br />Item was postponed until after the July 12 City Council meeting <br />C. Metro Denver presentation to Metro Mayor’s Caucus-what factors <br />enhance and limit our regional and state competitiveness – <br />Mayor Sisk <br />Mayor provided and overview of the presentation <br />X.Development Referrals –none <br />XI.Discussion Items for Next Meeting July 11, 2011 @ 7:30 AM, Louisville <br />Public Library 1st Floor Conference Room <br />XII.Commissioners’ Comments: <br />none <br />XIII.Adjourn <br />9:14 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.