My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
City Council Minutes 1994 10 04
PORTAL
>
CITY COUNCIL RECORDS
>
MINUTES (45.090)
>
1970-1999 City Council Minutes
>
1994 City Council Minutes
>
City Council Minutes 1994 10 04
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
3/11/2021 2:36:38 PM
Creation date
5/26/2004 10:37:41 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
City Council Records
Doc Type
City Council Minutes
Signed Date
10/4/1994
Original Hardcopy Storage
2E4
Supplemental fields
Test
CCMIN 1994 10 04
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
24
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
explained that staff requested, if Council wishes to approve this, that it be with two conditions into <br />the Resolution: <br /> <br />1.) <br /> <br />2.) <br /> <br />That an access easement to Via Appia across the Recreation Center property should <br />be shown on the PUD and Plat. Prior to recording of this PUD and Plat, this <br />easement needed to be dedicated by a separate instrument and recorded with the <br />recording information noted on the PUD and Plat. <br />No construction traffic would access the site from Owl Drive. All construction access <br />should be restricted to Via Appia. <br /> <br />Wood asked to add into the record the City Zoning and Subdivision Ordinances, minutes and the <br />video recordings of the Planning Commission meetings and hearings on the Centennial II application, <br />all documents made a part of the record during the hearings before the Planning Commission on the <br />Centennial II application, all of the non-confidential Planning Department files on the Centennial II <br />application, the Council communication and all other non-confidential Council packet documents <br />provided to City Council on Wednesday, September 28, 1994, in preparation of this hearing, the City <br />Attorney's exhibits A, B, and C, and the additional Council packet documents provided to City <br />Council on Friday, September 30, 1994, in preparation of this hearing. <br /> <br />Davidson admitted the above mentioned documents as part of the record (ALL DOCUMENTS <br />LOCATED IN CENTRAL FILE AND/OR PLANNING DEPARTMENT). <br /> <br />Davidson called for the applicant's presentation. <br /> <br />Tom Hoyt, President of McStain Enterprises, 75 Manhattan Drive, Boulder, Colorado, stated that <br />this is not a re-zoning, as this piece of property was zoned by the Master Plan process. He <br />commented that this project first came to the city officially as an annexation in 1979 and they became <br />involved in it shortly thereafter. The original annexation included the whole Centennial property. He <br />referred to the 1985 Master Plan, which is the current master plan that controls the site. He <br />commented that the 1981 Master Plan was put in place just for their property. He went on to review <br />the history of this project. He stated that the location of that site was clearly geared to the <br />intersection of the major streets. <br /> <br />Jon Kottke, attorney for McStain, 2975 Valmont Road, Boulder, Colorado, asked the City Attorney <br />to go over a list of items that Kottke wanted to add as part of the record, which the City Attorney <br />agreed to do later in the evening. He commented that in a letter addressed to Paul Wood and the <br />Planning Commission, dated July 22, 1994, McStain detailed each of the Special Review requirements <br />and how this proposal met all of them. He stated that the city's planning staff recognized that they <br />had met all of the requirements. In its recommendation to the Planning Commission for the August <br />8, 1994, staff report addressed to the Planning Commission on page 5 it stated that the Special <br />Review Use criteria, Section 17.40.100, and PUD criteria, Section 17.28.120, was used to evaluate <br />this project and staffs findings were that with recommended conditions, these criteria can be met. <br />He commented that staff went on to recommend approval of the Special Review Use Final PUD <br /> <br />7 <br /> <br /> <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.