City Council Minutes 2000 02 01 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

Nancy Blackwood, Blackwood & Company, 1065 19th Street, Boulder, commented that she believed that the text provided for R-RR zoning states the overall density shall not exceed one unit per five acres. Mayer asked for clarification from the City Attorney at the next meeting. Sam Light, City Attorney, stated that staff would address this matter before the next meeting. He felt there were two issues; 1 .) What is the meaning of the sentence in question, and 2.) What is the correct way for the applicant to make their request, should they request a lesser lot size or greater density than the zoning allows. Should that request be reviewed through the annexation agreement or through the PUD process. Those issues would be addressed. Mayer stated that in the past, Council would process annexation, zoning and PUD, and that applicants would not request annexation unless a PUD ran concurrently with the annexation. Mr. Keim stated that the process, outlined by Mayer, was their original intent, however circumstances lead to a different path. He stated that he felt Mr. Bowes would consider going back to a site plan based annexation that would resolve the majority of Council concerns. Mayer noted that a PUD has a time limit of three years, however there are no time limitations on zoning. It would concern the Council if zoning were procured for speculative reasons. However, if there is a PUD, the applicant understands that any rights over and above the zoning, are granted under the PUD and not under City Code. Nancy Blackwood stated that the PUD plan application and process is quite costly, and the applicant, Mr. Bowes, does not have a great deal of money to develop the property. It was therefore determined that it wasn't prudent for Mr. Bowes to proceed with the process of a PUD concurrent with the annexation. She stated that the consultants have tried to craft a process where Mr. Bowes does not have to spend an exorbitant amount of money to get approval on a certain amount of units. She stated that the consultants and the applicant have struggled for a year to resolve these issues. Mr. Keim addressed Howard' s concern of the roadways, and noted they shared that concern. He stated that the roadways proposed within the Bowes annexation are the same as exists on Dillon Road today. He noted the only difference is whether there is parking or not along the roadway; stating that it is very similar to what was used along the Monarch campus. The roadway is a rural road that has no curb and gutter, has a gravel shoulder, and provides for off street parking where convenient. Howard asked if the applicant requests only two lanes, and is the applicant interested in prohibiting parking. Mr. Keim stated that was the intent. 18