City Council Minutes 2003 12 16 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

Louisville City Council Meeting December 16, 2003 Page 5 of 18 2) the annexation and zoning agreement are still pending before Council. As these items are still outstanding, City Council has the option to disapprove the annexation or continue the public hearing to March 16, 2004. Wood summarized the STK Annexation and Development Agreement. The applicant has elected to propose a combined annexation and development agreement. Wood outlined the sections that have been discussed with the Planning Commission as follows: Conditions Precedent - Section 2.3 & PCZD Zoning - Section 3.1; Vested Property Rights - Section 3; Residential Building Permits - Section 3.6; Public Improvement Permits - Section 3.6; Public Improvement Financing - Section 4; Section 4.3 - Parks, Open Space and Trails; and Section 4-5 Maintenance; Exhibit E. Wood referenced three memorandums pertaining to various sections of the agreement: 1) September 15, 2003 Memo from Light, Harrington & Dawes, P.C., outlining the position of the City Attorney's office on the provisions of the Agreement; 2) December 12, 2003 Memo from Deputy City Manager Julie Boyd, discussing Special Metropolitan Districts; and 3) December 9, 2003 Memo from Director of Public Works Tom Phare discussing water rights, and the scope and funding of public improvements. Mayor Davidson opened the public hearing. Nell Schoeler, StorageTek, One StorageTek Drive, Louisville, CO, stated STK representatives are available to answer questions. Margaret Hombostel, 655 W. Hawthom Street, Louisville, CO, voiced her opposition to the StorageTek annexation. She objected to the 20-year vested rights issue, the water and sewer tap reimbursement to the development, and the tax incentive solution. She urged Council to vote against the annexation. Tom Mayer, 580 Wildrose Way, Louisville, CO, addressed the Council in his capacity of County Commissioner and expressed the County Commissioner's desire to purchase the property as open space. He addressed the incentives requested by StorageTek and stated the annexation is not in the interest of the City. Speaking as a Louisville resident, he stated the City's financial analysis does not address the impact to the City and suggested a professional financial analysis be obtained. He urged Council to deny the annexation. Jay Berger, 1016 Main Street, Louisville, CO, concurred with the comments voiced by Ms. Hombostel. He noted the citizen's amendment to the comp plan would be eligible to review within sixty days. He requested the City host an open house to allow pubic discussion. Ty Gee, 253 Hoover Street, Louisville, CO, stated the County has expressed an interest in purchasing STK's 80-acre parcel for open space. He felt the comprehensive plan amendment should address the broad wishes of the citizens of Louisville and noted the comprehensive plan stipulates no housing units on the 80-acres. He noted the process 5