Laserfiche WebLink
Louisville City Council Meeting <br />March 20, 2001 <br />Page 6 <br /> <br />community. He concurred with the comments made by Donna Wicker with respect to the <br />condition for amendment through the PUD process. He recommended that Council <br />approve the annexation agreement. <br /> <br />Rob Ellwood-Digel, 275 W~ Walnut Drive, Louisville, CO, voiced his support of the <br />Fischer Annexation Agreement. He stated that he strongly believed in the special <br />provisions of the agreement. He noted that this is a unique situation and could be one of <br />the last two open space parcels within the City of Louisville. <br /> <br />Debbie Hansen, 350 W. Spruce Street, Louisville, CO, stated that she is in favor of the <br />annexation. She suggested that, perhaps through the PUD process, a better design for the <br />private drive can be investigated. She voiced her concern with the location of the private <br />drive in the vicinity of the bike trail. She noted that it is an area highly used by bikers and <br />walkers. <br /> <br />Hearing no further public comment, Howard closed the public heating. <br /> <br />COUNCIL QUESTIONS <br /> <br />Levihn asked the applicant who would maintain the proposed private drive off Spruce <br />Street. <br /> <br />Scott Scarbaugh, Fischer Farms LLC, 1823 Canyon Boulevard, Boulder, CO, stated that <br />a homeowner association would maintain the private drive. He noted that the home <br />owners association will also maintain the outlots and the island in the middle of the cul- <br />de-sac. <br /> <br />Levihn asked if the diagram represents a walkway between Lots 3 and 4 as access to the <br />open space. Sparn stated that the walkway has been there for some time and will access <br />the open space. <br /> <br />Levihn stated that it has been a very long process but the applicant has met all of the <br />conditions. He stated that he was in favor of the concept plan. <br /> <br />Simmons stated, for clarification, that the annexation agreement does not require the <br />applicant to make any improvements to the open space. That would be the responsibility <br />of the City. <br /> <br />Mayer asked the applicant if the private drive will be maintained by four homeowners. <br />Scarbaugh stated that the covenants will be recorded against the property which specifies <br />the maintenance of the private drive will be associated with the four lots that use the <br />private drive. He stated that it would be the homeowners' expense. The maintenance of <br />the open space and landscaping will be through the homeowners association. <br /> <br />6 <br /> <br /> <br />