My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
City Council Study Session Summary 2012 03 13
PORTAL
>
CITY COUNCIL RECORDS
>
STUDY SESSIONS (45.010)
>
2010-2019 City Council Study Sessions
>
2012 City Council Study Sessions
>
City Council Study Session Summary 2012 03 13
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
5/6/2019 11:49:08 AM
Creation date
6/8/2012 2:03:47 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
CITYWIDE
Supplemental fields
Test
SSSUM 2012 03 13
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
7
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
City Council <br />Study Session Summary <br />March 13, 2012 <br />Page 5of 7 <br />Provide notice to applicants of expiration of a permit. Would like to see a <br />permit effective for three years rather than one year, but to ensure the <br />applicant knows the permit does not stay in effect for perpetuity. <br />Regarding the six requirements to accompany the permit application, is it <br />possible for some of those to be handled through the Planning <br />Department, which ones are absolutely necessary and which ones can be <br />omitted? <br />Don’t put the burden on the property owner for documents they may not <br />have in their possession. <br />Principal Planner McCartney suggested that on the application handout <br />there could be amore detailed listing showing which documents are <br />required and which are optional. <br />Don’t want to encourage speculative scrape-offs. <br />Wants an extension for hardship available for the applicant if the permit is <br />effective just for one-year, and wants approval of this extension to be a <br />staff decision. <br />Inform the applicant that a copy of the plan that accompanies the <br />application could be very helpful to include as it might expedite the <br />approval through the HPC. <br />Councilmember Keany requested a report showing the list of approved demo <br />permits and which ones are outstanding. Principal Planner McCartney <br />committed to providing this information to City Council. <br />Councilmember Jasiak thought it would be beneficial when notifying applicants <br />that their permit is ready to expire,that if they need to reapply they would need to <br />pay the current fee which might be quite a bit greater than what they paid when <br />they initially applied. <br />Councilmember Dalton suggested the HPC visit with the Downtown Business <br />Association and talk to merchants. <br />City Manager Fleming asked how many permits have had problems,and the <br />response from the Planning staff was not that many. <br />Mayor Muckle summarized that it doesn’t appear the demo process has been a <br />problemfor residential and businesses in the past. <br />Update/Discussion –The 42 Gateway Project –Purpose and Needand <br />Project Goals <br />Gavin McMillan, Planner III, gave a brief update of the project. The Highway 42 <br />Gateway Project is a partnership between the City of Louisville, CDOT, Boulder <br />County and RTD to complete an Integrated Infrastructure Implementation Plan <br /> <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.