My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
City Council Minutes 2015 06 02
PORTAL
>
CITY COUNCIL RECORDS
>
MINUTES (45.090)
>
2015 City Council Minutes
>
City Council Minutes 2015 06 02
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
9/19/2022 3:13:00 PM
Creation date
7/15/2015 11:11:29 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
City Council Records
Doc Type
City Council Minutes
Original Hardcopy Storage
9C1
Supplemental fields
Test
CCMIN 2015 06 02
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
27
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 2, 2015 <br />Page 8 of 27 <br />see the change as a real reduction of traffic. He felt creative staff and open minded <br />citizens could find a solution with no further study. <br />Mayor Muckle asked the unhappiness be directed his way. He felt the realignment of <br />Main Street was a reasonable consideration within abstract terms. He found the <br />testimony compelling and didn't have any interest in taking homes, let alone historic <br />homes. <br />MOTION: Mayor Muckle moved to not pursue realignment of Main Street in the next <br />phases of the South Boulder Road Small Area Plan. Council member Lipton seconded. <br />Voice vote 6 -1, Dalton opposing. <br />Mayor Muckle suggested Council release the 1125 Pine Street property with bringing it <br />back as a future agenda item. The property owner asked for expediency. <br />Council member Stolzmann asked Council to consider endorsing three principles as <br />they move forward with the small area plan to relieve resident anxiety. <br />1. No changes to zoning to allow for additional high density housing in this corridor. <br />2. Respect individual property owner rights. <br />3. Minimize conditional zoning so community members have more certainty. <br />She addressed senior and affordable housing. She noted there was a significant <br />increase in senior and affordable housing with the annexation of the Boulder County <br />property. She suggested going over the other public improvements carefully as these <br />are not the only homeowners who would be impacted. She felt existing zoning is the <br />best option presented. This will add more residential, but the other options result in <br />even more residential. She saw little benefit in studying the Survey or Workshop option <br />because the retail and office projections will not be supported by market realities. <br />Council member Lipton felt Council member Stolzmann had basically articulated his <br />stand. He suggested general principles to agree on based on what has been seen. He <br />thought this corridor was maxed out and was not in favor of going further than already <br />allowed. He was not convinced any high density should be allowed, even conditionally. <br />He was leaning toward a go slow strategy. <br />Council member Loo wanted to revisit Council member Stolzmann's suggested <br />principles. <br />Council member Stolzmann described her method of arriving at an estimate of <br />residential housing with the current zoning. She noted it was similar to what planning <br />referred to as entitled but was slightly less, by taking out the properties she saw as <br />highly unlikely to be redeveloped. <br />Council member Keany stated he generally supported the first principle. <br />City Attorney Light cautioned Council against putting this support for the principles in the <br />form of a motion but could proceed by noting this was to guide staff. He stated Council <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.