My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
City Council Minutes 2000 08 15
PORTAL
>
CITY COUNCIL RECORDS
>
MINUTES (45.090)
>
2000 City Council Minutes
>
City Council Minutes 2000 08 15
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
3/11/2021 2:36:46 PM
Creation date
2/2/2004 11:22:29 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
City Council Records
Doc Type
City Council Minutes
Signed Date
8/15/2000
Original Hardcopy Storage
7B6
Supplemental fields
Test
CCMIN 2000 08 15
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
20
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
Louisville City Council Meeting <br />August 15, 2000 <br />Page 15. <br /> <br />Davidson called for Applicant presentation. <br /> <br />Paul Pennock, Zeiler-Pennock, Inc., Architect and Engineers, 2727 Bryant Street, Suite <br />600, Denver, CO, introduced himself as the project architect. Pennock addressed one <br />issue continued from the last Council meeting, the subdivision of the parcel. Pennock <br />stated that the applicant is willing to remove the common property line and make the <br />PUD into one parcel. He advised Council that if the applicant later decided to subdivide, <br />they would come back to make that request. <br /> <br />COUNCIL COMMENTS: <br /> <br />Mayer stated that the other issue that was continued was the public access easement. <br /> <br />Howard asked if the McBride Brothers brought up the issue of access. Pennock stated <br />that it was brought up by the City Council. <br /> <br />Davidson stated that the project proposal is for a single parcel. Davidson asked Wood if <br />the Fire District has reviewed this access road. Wood stated that the Fire District has <br />reviewed this issue and approved the resurfacing with recycled asphalt. <br /> <br />Davidson asked what would happen if the other property owners were not willing to pay <br />their pro-rated share of the resurfacing of the access road. Pennock stated that all of the <br />other property owners are in the same situation as the McBrides and were approved under <br />the same conditions. Pennock stated that it would be unfair if only the McBrides were <br />subject to paying for the resurfacing of the access road. He felt the other property owners <br />should share in the cost. <br /> <br />Howard asked if CTC was a district and if so, the CTC District should address the issue <br />of resurfacing of the access road. Pennock supported CTC District involvement. <br /> <br />Keany asked for confirmation on the number of lots affected by the easement and subject <br />to the resurfacing of the access road. Pennock stated that there are 12 lots and 7 property <br />owners. Keany asked Pennock for an estimate of the cost to resurface the access road. <br />Pennock estimated $25,000 - $30,000. <br /> <br />Mayer stated that this was a safety issue and suggested that the City Administrator work <br />with the CTC District to review the easement access roads. <br /> <br />15 <br /> <br /> <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.