My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
City Council Minutes 2013 04 16
PORTAL
>
CITY COUNCIL RECORDS
>
MINUTES (45.090)
>
2013 City Council Minutes
>
City Council Minutes 2013 04 16
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
3/11/2021 2:44:33 PM
Creation date
5/15/2013 1:23:37 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
City Council Records
Doc Type
City Council Minutes
Original Hardcopy Storage
7D4
Supplemental fields
Test
CCMIN 2013 04 16
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
23
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 />April 16, 2013 <br />Page 16 of 23 <br />People were asked five direct questions pertaining to the draft of the Comprehensive <br />Plan prior to March 29. Between 9 and 13% of people (depending on the question) <br />either wrote in comments requiring more information to answer the question or they <br />simply didn't know the answer or left these questions blank. The draft of the <br />Comprehensive Plan prior to March 29 has proposed changes to the framework of the <br />City primarily in multifamily housing, thus the questions echo the proposed changes. Of <br />the people who responded: <br />• 79% of people respond "No" when asked: `There are around 700 new multifamily <br />residential units currently planned or under construction in the city. Should the <br />Comprehensive Plan update allow construction of an additional 800 multifamily <br />units ?" <br />• 88% of people respond "No" when asked: `To keep operating costs constant, <br />would it be acceptable to you to have reductions in city services to accommodate <br />the increased demand created by additional multifamily units ?" <br />• 68% of people responded "No" when asked: "If the additional multifamily units <br />were approved, would you support raising taxes to keep city service levels <br />constant ?" <br />• 84% of people responded "Yes" when asked: "If drought conditions continue, <br />should the city place restrictions on development ?" <br />• 75% of people responded "No" when asked: "The City of Louisville is <br />approaching build -out because of open space buffers and other boundary <br />constraints. Do you favor adding to the population by allowing increased density <br />and multifamily residential units to the spaces currently zoned for retail ?" <br />The responses show an inconsistency between citizen's views and the draft of the <br />Comprehensive Plan prior to March 29. Conclusion: The survey provides data <br />regarding the characteristics and levels of service that people desire to maintain small <br />town character. Generally people feel the service level is adequate and should be <br />maintained. In addition, people want to continue the programs, services and code <br />restrictions that lead to small town character. Traffic in neighborhoods appears to be at <br />an acceptable rate and no more is desired. Traffic on major roads is acceptable for <br />about half of the residents and unacceptable to the other half. Generally, people do not <br />want increases in multifamily residential building beyond the currently planned projects, <br />and people do not want to see residential units in retail zoned spaces. <br />Camilla Donnelly, 2366 Senator Court, Louisville, CO complimented the City Staff for <br />their work on the Comprehensive Plan, however she did not agree with the provision for <br />multi - family units. She felt multi - family units would make Louisville a bedroom <br />community and the local character of Louisville would be lost. She requested Council <br />delay the vote on the Comprehensive Plan. She asked why the City is not <br />concentrating on commercial development. <br />Will Staton, 2396 McKinley Avenue, Louisville, Co thanked Planner, Gavin McMillan for <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.