My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
City Council Minutes 1993 04 14
PORTAL
>
CITY COUNCIL RECORDS
>
MINUTES (45.090)
>
1970-1999 City Council Minutes
>
1993 City Council Minutes
>
City Council Minutes 1993 04 14
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
3/11/2021 2:31:36 PM
Creation date
7/30/2004 11:38:57 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
City Council Records
Doc Type
City Council Minutes
Signed Date
4/14/1993
Original Hardcopy Storage
2E3
Supplemental fields
Test
CCMIN 1993 04 14
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
9
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
Maj-Lis Kemper, City Clerk, read the public statement for Executive <br />Sessions (SEE ATTACHED). <br /> <br />Davidson announced that the Executive Session would include Tom <br />Phare, Director of Public Works. <br /> <br />Roll call was taken. <br />EXECUTIVE SESSION <br /> <br />Motion passed by a 7 - 0 vote. <br /> <br />Davidson called the meeting back to order. <br /> <br />Davidson stated that in the Executive Session they discussed the <br />drainage issue, the Amendment 1 effects, and Ordinance No. 1082 <br />effects on the purchase, as well as potential Court action for an <br />injunction, and potential action for imminent domain. <br /> <br />Mayer felt that on a practical basis it is better to try to proceed <br />with this agreement. <br /> <br />Howard concurred with Mayer. He just didn't want to tie up current <br />and future Councils, because of an agreement that was thrown in at <br />the last minute and was at least partially agreed to by all of the <br />parties at various times during the negotiation process. <br /> <br />Sisk found the drainage issue to be particularly intrusive into the <br />City of Louisville, which he resented. He felt it needed to be <br />looked at from the standpoint of what was the original intent of <br />the IGA and how does that now dovetail with the drainage language <br />that has been proposed. <br /> <br />Hedding wanted to see Council go forward with this agreement, but <br />the drainage language is such that it's restrictive and there are <br />hidden potential problems that Louisville may regret years down the <br />line. He would like for the "20 years" to be changed to five (5) <br />years, then he could accept it. <br /> <br />Hornbostel didn't like the drainage language, either, but she felt <br />it was important for Louisville to be involved in this, because <br />Louisville would have no say, if they didn't participate. <br /> <br />Davidson felt there was language that had the potential of making <br />the development of the other corner of South Boulder Road and Hwy. <br />42, which is within the city limits of Louisville, a much more <br />difficult task. He thought the land will end up being open space, <br />anyway, because Lafayette and the County will buy it and he was <br />sure the language in the conservation trust will require it to be <br />open space. He had confidence that the people of Boulder County <br />will never change that. At this time, he did not favor Louisville <br />participating, because it limits what Louisville can do inside <br />current city limits of Louisville. He could not support it with <br />this language in agreement. <br /> <br />6 <br /> <br /> <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.