My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
City Council Agenda and Packet 2012 07 03
PORTAL
>
CITY COUNCIL RECORDS
>
AGENDAS & PACKETS (45.010)
>
2010-2019 City Council Agendas and Packets
>
2012 City Council Agendas and Packets
>
City Council Agenda and Packet 2012 07 03
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
3/11/2021 2:05:43 PM
Creation date
9/26/2012 2:51:08 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
City Council Records
Doc Type
City Council Packet
Original Hardcopy Storage
6D1
Record Series Code
45.010
Supplemental fields
Test
CCAGPKT 2012 07 03
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
195
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 />Meeting Minutes <br />June 19, 2012 <br />Page 3 of 20 <br />WOULD CONTAIN A TOTAL OF 160 APARTMENT UNITS AND STRUCTURED <br />PARKING, AND 9,500 SQUARE FEET OF RETAIL DEVELOPMENT ON TRACT ONE <br />OF THE LOUISVILLE NORTH FILING 7 SUBDIVISION LOCATED AT 707 EAST <br />SOUTH BOULDER ROAD (advertised Daily Camera 4/15/2012) (CONTINUED <br />FROM JUNE 5, 2012) <br />Mayor Muckle reopened the public hearing and requested an Attorney presentation. <br />City Attorney Light reminded Council as a result of extensive public hearings, there was <br />direction to staff to bring back a resolution to deny the application for the Safeway <br />project. He stated this is in draft form assembled from culling the record with findings <br />included and could be approved as presented or changes could be made if Council <br />desired. <br />PUBLIC COMMENT <br />Mayor Muckle called for public comment and hearing none, called for Council comment. <br />COUNCIL COMMENT <br />Mayor Pro Tem Dalton pointed to the last phrase of the second page of the resolution. <br />He thought the phrase indicated the 54,000 retail space was needed and wasn't sure <br />that conclusion was accurate. He felt the retail the residents wanted was not likely to <br />happen at this site and felt all the findings were subjective. He wondered if all the <br />statements were necessary <br />Attorney Light stated this document would be a record of the Council's denial and stated <br />there need not be numerous findings if Council preferred. <br />Mayor Muckle suggested exact numbers were not important, but felt some statement <br />was necessary regarding a significant reduction in retail space being a problem. <br />Council member Yarnell wondered if there was a need to look at how much retail was <br />enough or if a general statement would suffice. <br />Attorney Light suggested Council could add the phrase "extensive an" without specific <br />numbers. <br />Council member Loo was in favor of a more general approach. She thought it was <br />difficult to capture the feeling of the entire Council as there were many differing reasons <br />for opposing. <br />Mayor Muckle called for public comment. <br />PUBLIC COMMENT <br />15 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.