My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
City Council Minutes 1995 07 18
PORTAL
>
CITY COUNCIL RECORDS
>
MINUTES (45.090)
>
1970-1999 City Council Minutes
>
1995 City Council Minutes
>
City Council Minutes 1995 07 18
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
3/11/2021 2:36:39 PM
Creation date
4/20/2004 9:20:08 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
City Council Records
Doc Type
City Council Minutes
Signed Date
7/18/1995
Original Hardcopy Storage
2E4
Supplemental fields
Test
CCMIN 1995 07 18
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
14
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
ordinance acknowledges a diversity of lot sizes within Old Town and proposes a reasonable limit of <br />development potential given the lot size. <br /> <br />Peter Stewart, 1132 Jefferson, Louisville, Colorado, Architect and Planner residing in Old Town <br />Louisville, generally liked the document, but wanted to point out what he thought there were <br />oversights on the final draft. <br /> <br />2.) <br />3.) <br /> <br />He felt there should be a maximum front yard setback or a percentage that had <br />everything within what the building frontages are now. <br />He felt the garage should be 20' beyond the face of the building. <br />Concerning the accessory building setbacks in relation to a public right-of-way, the <br />Old Town standard is with garages on both sides of the alley with zero, zero setbacks. <br />The ordinance shows 8' to 15' setback. He felt that should be changed. <br /> <br />Stewart recommended approval of the ordinance with those three changes. <br /> <br />Davidson called for Council questions and comments. <br /> <br />Mayer asked Wood and Peter Kernkamp, Planner, to comment on Stewart's suggestions. <br /> <br />Kernkamp stated that they eliminated the maximum front yard setback because there was some <br />confusion as to what it exactly meant. He stated that to this point it had not really been a problem. <br />It had been more where someone is trying to match what had already been there or trying to find <br />room to make a reasonable addition. On the accessory structure setback, what is being proposed <br />reduces, where an accessory structure is adjacent to an alley, the rear yard setback to zero feet with <br />one exception: Ifa garage door enters onto the alley, 20' from the opposite of the platted alley to all <br />for adequate maneuvering room. He felt the garages that are entered from the street were addressed <br />in the Ordinance by a 40' setback from the front property line. <br /> <br />Sisk suggested a statement saying that under no circumstances shall the garage be built beyond the <br />face of the building and their house could be no more than 5' back of the neighbors on either side. <br /> <br />Keany asked how many of the 25' or 37.5' lots there were downtown. <br /> <br />Kernkamp thought about 6% of the parcels were 25', about 6% were 37.5', and a little over 50% <br />were at 50'. <br /> <br />Mayer moved that Council approve Ordinance No. 1195, Series 1995, on first reading, set out for <br />publication, and set a public hearing for August 1, 1995. Seconded by Howard. <br /> <br />Sisk offered friendly amendments to insert the garage offset from the face of the building and inserting <br />a provision whereby there would be a house that could not be located further than 5' from the <br />adjacent houses, as far as frontage was concerned. <br /> <br />11 <br /> <br /> <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.